[Advaita-l] Doubts in Gita-BG-2-12

[V Subrahmanian]

Namaste

All the objections raised can be answered by the following scriptural
statements themselves, that Shankara cites widely across his bhashyas:

1.  In the Mahabharata Bhagavan Narayana displays His vishwarupa to Narada,
by making a 'disclaimer':  Whatever I have displayed to you, the entire
vision of Creation, is through My Maayaa.  Hence, do not take it to be
real.' Shankara has cited this verse twice: 1. to show that the
BhagavadrUpam is mAyA kalpitam, and 2. to show the mithyAtva of the
creation:

In Brahma sutra bhashyam 3.2.17:  Shankara cites several Shruti passages
and the Mahabharata for the purpose:  The Shruti teaches Brahman by
negating all non-Brahman:
दर्शयति चाथो अपि स्मर्यते ॥ १७ ॥

दर्शयति च श्रुतिः पररूपप्रतिषेधेनैव ब्रह्म — निर्विशेषत्वात् — ‘अथात आदेशो
नेति नेति’ (बृ. उ. २ । ३ । ६)
<https://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/display/bhashya/Brha/devanagari?page=2&id=BR_C02_S03_V06&hl=%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%A5%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A4%20%E0%A4%86%E0%A4%A6%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%B6%E0%A5%8B%20%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%BF%20%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%BF>
 ‘अन्यदेव तद्विदितादथो अविदितादधि’ (के. उ. १ । ४)
<https://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/display/bhashya/Kena_pada/devanagari?page=1&id=KP_C01_V04&hl=%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%A6%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%B5%20%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%A6%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%A6%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A6%E0%A4%A5%E0%A5%8B%20%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%A6%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A6%E0%A4%A7%E0%A4%BF>
 ‘यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते अप्राप्य मनसा सह’ (तै. उ. २ । ४ । १)
<https://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/display/bhashya/Taitiriya/devanagari?page=2&id=T_C02_S04_V01&hl=%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8B%20%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%9A%E0%A5%8B%20%E0%A4%A8%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%87%20%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%AA%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%AA%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%20%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%A8%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%BE%20%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%B9>
इत्येवमाद्या ।
बाष्कलिना च बाध्वः पृष्टः सन् अवचनेनैव ब्रह्म प्रोवाचेति श्रूयते — ‘स
होवाचाधीहि भो इति स तूष्णीं बभूव तं ह द्वितीये तृतीये वा वचन उवाच ब्रूमः
खलु त्वं तु न विजानासि । उपशान्तोऽयमात्मा’ इति । तथा स्मृतिष्वपि
परप्रतिषेधेनैवोपदिश्यते — ‘ज्ञेयं यत्तत्प्रवक्ष्यामि
यज्ज्ञात्वामृतमश्नुते । अनादिमत्परं ब्रह्म न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते’ (भ. गी. १३ ।
१२)
<https://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/display/bhashya/Gita/devanagari?page=13&id=BG_C13_V12&hl=%E0%A4%9C%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%9E%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%82%20%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AA%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B7%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%BF%20%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%9C%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%9C%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%9E%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%83%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%B6%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%81%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%87%C2%A0%E0%A5%A4%20%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%A8%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A6%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AA%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%82%20%E0%A4%AC%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%B9%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AE%20%E0%A4%A8%20%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A8%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%A6%E0%A5%81%E0%A4%9A%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%87>
इत्येवमाद्यासु ।
तथा विश्वरूपधरो नारायणो नारदमुवाचेति स्मर्यते — *‘माया ह्येषा मया सृष्टा
यन्मां पश्यसि नारद ।’ (म. भा. १२ । ३३९ । ४५) ‘सर्वभूतगुणैर्युक्तं नैवं मां
ज्ञातुमर्हसि’ (म. भा. १२ । ३३९ । ४६) इति* ॥ १७ ॥
So, from the statement of Bhagavan to Narada what follows is:

1.Bhagavan has the knowledge of the mithyAtva of jagat.  This implies he
has knowledge of his own Brahmatvam, Advaita jnanam.  Yet he is seen
teaching Narada the para tattvam.  There is no contradiction here:
Bhagavan knows that the difference: you, Narada and Me, the Lord and This
jagat - all three, duality, is in the realm of avidya/maayaa and it is
perfectly possible to use bahuvachanam with reference to the bodies, of
Himself and of Narada and all the jivas in that maayaa-created jagat, and
yet holding that the Atma is only one which alone appears as all this
maayaa-created jagat in which alone this very vishva rupa darshanam to
Narada also is included. Here the Paratattvam is Bhagavan in his Nirguna
svarupam which alone remains after the maaya crated vishvarupam and
Narada's body-mind complex, which is part of the maya created vishvarupam,
are negated.
2.  It is perfectly possible for the duality of Guru - Shishya and the
ShikshA (teaching) in the Advaita model, amply demonstrated by the Lord in
the Mahabharata cited above.
3. Swami Vidyaranya, in the Panchadashi, has said:  Jagat mithyAtva jnAnam
does not demand the coming to the end of perception of duality.  In fact in
the absence of such a perception of duality for the Jnani, jivanmukti is
impossible. This is because jivanmukti means the experience of prarabdha
bhoga which can happen only when the jagat is there which gives bhoga to
the body mind complex.
The Shruti accepts jivanmukti by showing to us countless examples:
Yajnavalkya doing so much vyavahara, Uddaalaka who taught Tattvamasi to son
Shvetaketu, Yama who taught neha nAnAsti kinchana = there is no duality at
all in Brahman - to Nachiketas, AjAtashatru the King of Kashi teaching
Baalaaki, the brahmana, in the Brihadaranyaka upanishat, Sanatkumara to
Narada, Prajapati to Indra, Indra to Pratardana (Kaushitaki upanishad and
discussed in the Brahma sutra bhashya), etc.  In all these cases the
teacher of the Para Tattva is a Jnani, jivanmukta, and the teaching to some
person occurs.
There are instances in the Bhagavatam where the world is given the
rope-snake analogy. The brahmatmaikatva jnanam of Parikshit is taught ,
'BrahmAham' for kaivalya mukti. The very beginning of the Bhagavatam, the
first shloka itself, has the mRShAtvam of srishTi. Brahman alone appearing
of the jiva and jagat is also in the Bhagavatam.  Vishnu Purana has its own
quota of Advaita. Prahlada's Advaitic realization is detailed there.
All these only contradict non-Advaitic schools.
Thus the objections raised by Ramanuja and Vedanta Desika are all addressed
already by the Shruti, Smriti and Shankara Bhashya.  A correct study and
understanding of these would not have resulted in these objections.
warm regards
subbu


On Wed, Jan 1, 2025 at 2:10 PM Sangeerth P via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaskaram
>
> I am herewith attaching the questions asked from the purvapaksha from
> Vishishtadvaita Darshana for the Gita sloka-
>
> न त्वेवाहं जातु नासं न त्वं नेमे जनाधिपाः ।
> न चैव नभविष्यामः सर्वे वयमतः परम् ॥ १२ ॥
> Here I am attaching the link
> <
> https://www.gitasupersite.iitk.ac.in/srimad?language=dv&field_chapter_value=2&field_nsutra_value=12&scsh=1&scram=1&scvv=1
> >
> which
> will display the commentaries of both Sri Ramanujar (Gita Bashya[GB]) and
> Swami Vedanta Desikar's (Gita Bashya Tatparya Chandrika[TC]).
>
> Now moving to Ramanuja's and Desikar's arguments:
>
>    1. अज्ञानमोहितं प्रति तन्निवृत्तये
>    पारमार्थिकनित्यत्वोपदेशसमयेअहम्त्वम्इमेसर्वेवयम् इति
> व्यपदेशात्।-[GB-2-12]
>    1. In this line Ramanujar clearly tells that this is the time of advice
>       (all the acharyas atleast to the least knowledge which I have,
> had accepted
>       to the fact that the Gita shastra has come to remove the
> delusion). During
>       this time of advice, Krishna teaches him using the specific words - I
>       (aham), you (tvam), these (ime), we all (vayam) have been used.
> This bedha
>       is *पारमार्थिक*.
>       2. I think this is the reply which he wants to give to Adishankara
>       who in his Gita bashya tells देहेभेदानुवृत्त्या बहुवचनं
> नात्मभेदाभिप्रायेण।
>       (the multiplicity is told because of beda in the deha and not
> the atma beda)
>
>