[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Brahmakara vritti refuted

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Michael


Namaste  Venkarraghavan.
>
> //I do not wish to play this game // But still you play!
>

Indeed - the nature of samsAra in a sentence!


> There are many of "you," few of "us" - it can be overwhelming.
>
However, I see that again you have chosen to respond by ignoring the
substantive argument in the email and have resorted to a non sequitur.

Below you have given citations without source - not the way to encourage a
> response.
>
What do you mean? I have provided 3 references in my two emails and even
quoted the actual words from BSB. adhyAsa bhAShya, BSB 1.3.19 and BSB
1.1.4. Sorry, I thought that for a student of Vedanta, providing the texts
verbatim was sufficient.

Regardless, HH SSS is the game - it is his insights and logic that needs to
> be considered. Here we write paragraphs and an occasional page - that's not
> the way to determine the truth of Vedanta. It takes a teacher particularly
> when confronted with 1200 years of entrenched thinking that somehow missed
> a fundamental  - ignorance is an error, not some positive causal shroud.
>
Fail to see the relevance of the above to the topic.

// No one is claiming that akhaNDAkAra vRtti objectifies Brahman for you
> to point them to us as though we are in disagreement.
>
> Rather, the akhaNDAkAra vRtti is the knowledge of the absolute identity of
> the self,//
> Sir, aren't these two sentences contradictory? if it's a vritti, it has an
> object.
>

No. In the second statement, it is not Brahman that is being objectified -
i.e revealed - but identity. The self is ever available and so, is not
revealed by the vRtti.

>
> // No one is claiming that akhaNDAkAra vRtti objectifies Brahman for you
> to point them to us as though we are in disagreement.
> Rather, the akhaNDAkAra vRtti is the knowledge of the absolute identity of
> the self,//
> If sastra is the pramana, where is the need for a special vritti? Tat twam
> asi dispels all apparent vrittis.
>
Sir, all vRtti means is the thought generated about something representing
the comprehension of that thing. I hear the word cat, and the word meaning
appears as a thought. That thought is cat vRtti.
pramANa simply means that which generates such a valid thought. Does the
sentence tattvamasi create an understanding "I am Brahman" or not? If it
doesn't, it is you who is denying the prAmANya of such a sentence. If you
admit it creates a valid understanding, the thought that the understanding
represents is akhanDAkAra vRtti. That is all.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan

Otherwise, I do not have difficulty with what you have written. This
> business of vritti vyapti and phala vyapti along with AKV are never
> mentioned in sastra or bhasya. Though I see how these notions can be
> reconciled, I still find them as unnecessary complications.
>
> I have spent the better part of the day responding to you and other
> comments in this thread.  I must excuse myself from further 'play'  despite
> worthy conversations/
>
> 🙏🙏🙏
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 3:48 PM Michael Chandra Cohen <
> michaelchandra108 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Namaste Sudhanshuji,
>>
>> I did not look up your Chandogya reference. I have rarely taken recourse
>> to search PTB in Sanskrit. If you can point me to searchable PTB, I would
>> be most appreciative.
>>
>> The objection to phala vyapti is that it is an unnecessary assumption and
>> not found in PTB.
>>
>> "When one tries to get the knowledge of a particular thing with the help
>> of teachings, observations etc, then the vritti pervades the thing
>> with Chidabhasa. Without being pervaded by the nature of consciousness of
>> the Self, it is impossible
>> to imagine the very existence of the vritti. Whenever there is any
>> knowledge of any object,
>> the knowledge of the object pervaded by the pure conciousness of Arman
>> alone is obtained. So
>> when the Vritti with consciousness (i. e. with Chidabhasa ) pervades the
>> thing, then automatically
>> rhe Phala Bhuta Jnana or Phalabhuta Anuhhava generates in the mind.
>> Hence. once the
>> pramana removes the non-perception apd misconception of a· tbing the
>> Phala Bhuta . In.na will
>> result and that alone is the func;tion of a praz:nana." Kulkarni,
>> Teaching of Brahman through avidya and maya, p36
>>
>> Kulkarni further clarifies that akhandakara vritti is discerning atma
>> from anatma and as a vritti it is pervaded by Brahman and not vice versa
>> "If all this duality be illusory, how is the knowledge of the Self to be
>> realised? It is thus replied:—The Knowers of Brahman describe knowledge,
>> *i.e.,* the mere essence of thought, which is unborn and free from all
>> imaginations as1 non-different from Brahman, the ultimate Reality, which
>> is also the object of knowledge. MKbh3.33"
>>
>> This knowledge of the Self (meaning, the firm conviction about the Real
>> nature of the Self, which is called ‘Atmapratyaya’ – see Mantra No.7 of
>> Mandukya), becomes one with the object, that is the Transcendental Reality
>> of Brahman. Here the knowledge itself becomes one with the Self. "HH SSS on
>> MKbh3.33
>>
>> If this is what is intended by phala vyapti and akhandakara vritti, so be
>> it, and I will rest. In fact, I have spent an inordinate amouint of time
>> responding to you and others on this thread and with the greatest respect,
>> will have to excuse myself from further input.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 3:03 PM Michael Chandra Cohen <
>> michaelchandra108 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Namaste Subbuji,
>>> It is great that you found these references to Brahma/akandhakara
>>> vritti. I struggled without success to find source material. Here is
>>> Chatgpt's translation of your link page:
>>>
>>> *Investigation - Results*
>>> *8 Results* *Śāstrasiddhāntaleśasaṅgraha - Third Section -
>>> Determination of the Negation of Brahmajnāna*
>>>
>>> "... However, the consciousness-light that has ascended that [state]
>>> negates it. Even though by its nature it serves as the witness of ignorance
>>> and other [mental modifications], and thus does not negate them, still,
>>> when it is ascended through the *akhaṇḍākāra-vṛtti*, its capability to
>>> negate them is justified. 'The sunlight, though illuminating grass, burns
>>> the grass only when focused through a lens'..."
>>>
>>> *Read further...*
>>> *Sarvavedāntasiddhāntasāra-saṅgraha - Verse*
>>>
>>> "...That *akhaṇḍākāra-vṛtti* is associated with the reflection of
>>> consciousness. Having taken as its sole object the Supreme Brahman, which
>>> is non-different from the Self..." (798)
>>>
>>> *Read further...*
>>> *Sarvavedāntasiddhāntasāra-saṅgraha - Verse*
>>>
>>> "...It negates the ignorance residing in that [mental state], which is
>>> of the nature of concealment. When ignorance is negated through the
>>> *akhaṇḍākāra-vṛtti*..." (799)
>>>
>>> *Read further...*
>>> *Sarvavedāntasiddhāntasāra-saṅgraha - Verse*
>>>
>>> "...The *akhaṇḍākāra-vṛtti* does not arise without reflection [on the
>>> teaching]. Through hearing, reflection, and meditation, undertaken
>>> continuously with intent..." (809)
>>>
>>> *Read further...*
>>> *Vedāntasāra*
>>>
>>> "...(10) Thus, the meaning of the statement based on direct experience
>>> is described. In this way, following the method of superimposition and
>>> negation, the teacher purifies the meanings of 'That' and 'Thou', and upon
>>> being instructed in the sentence with an undivided meaning, the qualified
>>> student attains the *akhaṇḍākāra-vṛtti*, which is the mental
>>> modification in the form of 'I am the infinite, ever-pure, intelligent,
>>> free, true, blissful, and boundless Brahman.' This mental modification,
>>> accompanied by the reflection of consciousness, takes as its object the
>>> unknown Supreme Brahman and negates the ignorance present in it. Just as
>>> the destruction of the cause of the cloth [i.e., the thread] leads to the
>>> destruction of the cloth itself, similarly, upon the negation of the entire
>>> causal ignorance, all its effects are negated, and with that, the
>>> *akhaṇḍākāra-vṛtti* is also negated. There, the reflected
>>> consciousness, like the radiance of a lamp being incapable of illuminating
>>> the sun’s radiance..."
>>>
>>> *Read further...*
>>> *Vivaraṇaprameyasaṅgraha - First Sūtra - First Section - Commentary*
>>>
>>> "...Thus, due to the negation of humanity in that [context], the
>>> perception of being human in the Self is an illusion. That is not so [in
>>> the case of reality]; otherwise, if one were to apprehend 'a broken piece
>>> of a cow' with the form of 'brokenness' imposed on the cow's attribute, and
>>> later negate that as 'this is not a fragment,' then the perception of
>>> brokenness would also have to be considered an illusion..."
>>>
>>> *Read further...*
>>> *Nyāyarakṣāmaṇi - First Chapter - First Section - Sūtra 17 - Commentary*
>>>
>>> "...In expressions such as 'This is a pot' or 'This is a cloth,' the
>>> words 'pot' and 'cloth,' which are used in conjunction with the mind
>>> engaged in such conceptualization, do not attain the state of
>>> *akhaṇḍākāra* [unbroken cognition]. When the śruti declares negation
>>> through statements like 'Now the instruction is—Not this, not this'
>>> (Bṛhadāraṇyaka 2.3.6), the mental modifications that arose before are
>>> withdrawn..."
>>>
>>> *Read further...*
>>> *Kṛṣṇālaṅkāra*
>>>
>>> "...According to this view, in the case of the individual self
>>> conditioned by the mind and the consciousness limited by the object it
>>> reflects, the non-difference is not manifested through mental
>>> modifications. Unlike the *akhaṇḍākāra-vṛtti*, the mental modifications
>>> relating to objects like pots cannot negate the conditioning adjuncts, and
>>> thus, since the distinguishing adjuncts—namely the mind and its
>>> object—persist, the non-difference between the individual self and Brahman
>>> does not manifest. This is the intended meaning..."
>>>
>>> *Read further...🙏🙏🙏*
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 12:16 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar <
>>> sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Namaste Michael ji.
>>>>
>>>> How do you understand the following sentence from Chhandogya Upanishad
>>>> bhAshya:
>>>>
>>>> अद्वैतज्ञानं मनोवृत्तिमात्रम्। That is -- advaita-jnAna is manO-vritti
>>>> only.
>>>>
>>>> Translation by Swami Gambhirananda:
>>>>
>>>> //As the nondual realisation (advaita-jnAna) is a mere mental
>>>> modification (manO-vritti), so also are the other meditations (upAsanA)
>>>> forms of mental modifications.
>>>>
>>>> Herein lies their similarity.
>>>>
>>>> Objection: Where then, lies the difference between the nondualistic
>>>> realisation (advaita-jnAna) and meditation (upAsanA)?
>>>>
>>>> Vedāntin: The nondualistic realisation demolishes the cognition of all
>>>> such differences as agent, instrument, action and results, which are
>>>> naturally superimposed on the actionless Self, just as knowledge in the
>>>> form of imposition of a snake etc. on a rope etc. is destroyed by the
>>>> realisation of the true nature of the rope etc. But meditation (upAsanA)
>>>> means establishing a continuous flow of similar modifications of the mind
>>>> in relation to some object as presented by the scriptures, (and)
>>>> uninterrupted by any foreign idea. This is the distinction.//
>>>>
>>>> If you read this carefully Michael ji, it is clear that advaita-jnAna
>>>> which leads to MOksha is stated unambiguously by BhAshyakAra to be a
>>>> manO-vritti.
>>>>
>>>> This is what is referred to as akhaNDAkArA-vritti.
>>>>
>>>> Please note that there is no contradiction of this bhAshya-vAkya with
>>>> the quotations provided by you which state that Brahman is not an object of
>>>> any vritti. Brahman is aprameya, avishaya. However, since avidyA regarding
>>>> Brahman is removed by this manO-vritti, Brahman is stated as vritti-vyApya.
>>>> When avidyA regarding Brahman is removed by advaita-jnAna, which is nothing
>>>> but a manO-vritti, the self-luminous Brahman reveals itself.
>>>>
>>>> Regards.
>>>> Sudhanshu Shekhar.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "advaitin" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>> an email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>>>> To view this discussion visit
>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAH9%3D%2BBA6q6ted73tCyA41GMCrUsrN0x8VMcEB40GXTZ%2B6Nwwow%40mail.gmail.com
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAH9%3D%2BBA6q6ted73tCyA41GMCrUsrN0x8VMcEB40GXTZ%2B6Nwwow%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "advaitin" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAAz9PvF9pytD6ZT6zkJpWHzZgLybA%3DsfT2kHFxAp1Y%3DU-b%3DYiw%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAAz9PvF9pytD6ZT6zkJpWHzZgLybA%3DsfT2kHFxAp1Y%3DU-b%3DYiw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>