You are here: SriPedia - Oppiliappan - Archives - Jul 2006

Oppiliappan List Archive: Message 00111 Jul 2006

 
Jul 2006 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: sarojram18 
  To: Oppiliappan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 10:48 PM
  Subject: [Oppiliappan] Sribhashya-the knower is present in sleep and release


  .Presence of'I' in deepsleep and release.
  The advaitin says that the knowership belongs to the ego and not 
  the self and this is proved by the fact that in deep sleep and in 
  realisation the ahamkAra, ego, is absent. But Ramanuja refutes this 
  view and says that 'thamO guna abhibhavAthparAgarTHa anubhava 
  abhAvAccha ahamarTHasya vivikthasphutaprathibhAsa abhAvE api 
  AprabhOdhAth ahamithyEkAkArENA Athmanh sphuraNAth sushupthou api 
  nAhambhAvigamah.' In sleep one is pervaded by thamas in the form of 
  ignorance and hence there is no distinct experience of anything 
  because there is no external manifestation to the ego . But when 
  awakened one remembers his identity and therefore the concept of 'I' 
  must have been present in sleep. On rising from sleep one does not 
  remember having been only a witness of a perception with no 
  experience but always recollects that he has slept well. So there has 
  been a knower who experienced the sukha of deep sleep. Also because 
  one has a recollection of his actions done before he went to sleep.
  To the objection that when awakened from sleep one also has the 
  feeling 'I did not know anything during the time of sleep,' Ramanuja 
  replies that it is not a denial of all experiences as otherwise even 
  the anubhuthi will be denied in sleep. The words 'I did not know' 
  proves the existence of 'I ' who did not know by which the perception 
  alone was denied. Sensible persons will not accept that the 'I' also 
  was absent at the time of sleep. Even the expression 'I' did not know 
  myself implies only the absence of the awareness of the identity of 
  oneself as so and so as in wakeful state but does not denote the 
  absence of 'I' itself.
  Moreover the advatin proclaims that the Self continues to exist as a 
  sAkshi, the witness consciousness. SAkshitva is not possible without 
  being a knower. It cannot be pure consciousness. One who knows can 
  only be a sAkshi according to the great grammarian PANini who 
  defines the word sAkshi as 'sAkshAth dhrashtari samjnAyAm,' the one 
  who sees, that is, one who knows, is the sAkshi. The Self by its very 
  existence shines for itself and as the'I.'Hence the Atma that shines 
  even in deep sleep does so as the real 'I.'
  Similarly it can be shown that the 'I' shines even in release. 
  Otherwise it will result in AthmanAsa, says Ramanuja. It cannot be 
  said that ahamarThah, the concept of 'I' is only an attribute wrongly 
  superimposed on the athman which alone disappears in release while 
  the athman remains. On the contrary the ahamarTha is not a mere 
  attribute but the very substance of the Self. Only the jnana is the 
  attribute of the Self. One aspires for moksha, relief, in order to 
  get rid of the thapathraya, the three kinds of suffering due to 
  samsara, which are AdhyAthmika, caused by one's own body and mind, 
  Adhidhaivika, due to destiny and Adhibhouthika caused by other by the 
  elements of nature, respectively. If there is the destruction of 
  the 'I,' the experiencer in release no one will strive for it. Hence 
  the 'I' which shines as a knower, is the inner self, prathyagathma. 
  This can be proved through inference also.The syllologism is stated 
  thus: ' Sa cha prathyagAthma mukthou api ahamithyeva prakAsathE 
  svasmai prakasamanathvath;yo yah svasmai prakasathE sah sarvo aham 
  ithyeva prakasathe; yaTHA thaTHA avabhasathvena ubhayavAdhi 
  sammathah samsaryAthma.' The Self shines only as the real 'I' even 
  in release because it shines for its own benefit. Whatever shines for 
  its own benefit shines as the 'I' as the samsAryAthma, the 
  transmigratory self. "Yah punah ahamithi na chakAsthi, nAsou svasmai 
  prakAsathE yaTHA ghatAdhih,' that which is not shining as aham,'I,' 
  does not shines for itself but requires another to manifest it, like 
  the pot.
  Advaitin objects to this saying that if the Self shines as 'I' in 
  mukthi it will not be different from the ego which is the product of 
  ignorance. Ramanuja replies that ignorance could be of three kinds. 
  It could be svrupaajnana, ignorance of the real nature, or 
  anyaTHAjnAna, misapprehension or viprithajnAna, wrong apprehension. 
  To understand the real nature of Athma as the real 'I' is not 
  ignorance.
  Next Ramanuja proves his point by citing the example of seers like 
  Vamadeva who have had the brahmasAkshAthkAra, by removal of avidhya , 
  perceived themselves as 'I' only, and not as pure 
  consciousness. 'Thdvaithathpasyan rshirvAmabEvah prathipEdhe aham 
  manurabhavam suryascha ithi.'(Brhd.3-4-10). The seer VAmadEva seeing 
  that( Brahman) observed 'I was Manu and the Sun. 'Ahmekah praTHamam 
  Asam varthAmi cha bhavishyAmicha.' "I alone existed, exist and will 
  exist."
  Such is the mode of expression even about Brahman, 'hanthAham imAh 
  thisrAh devathah' (Chan.6-3-2), 'I will enter these three 
  devathas,' 'bahusyAm prajAyEya,' 'I will become many' 'sa eekshatha 
  lokAnnusrjA ithi,' ' He willed; I will create the worlds.' In 
  bhagavatgita the lOrd says,iam the Self of all ,' and several similar 
  expressions are found in Gita.The svarupa of the Self is the only 
  real 'I' and the ahamkAra normally understood as'aham' is only a 
  product of matter as mentioned by the Lord 
  Himself 'mahAbhoothAnyahamkArO buddhiravyakthamEvacha,' the elements, 
  buddhi and ahamkAra are the products of the unmanifest prakrthi. The 
  word ahamkAra means that it makes one regard as 'I' that which is 
  not 'I'. The word is used in gita to denote pride; 'ahamkAram balam 
  dharpam'(BG18-53) and hence ahamkAra is only the product of 
  ignorance, which gives the impression of 'aham' in body, mind and 
  intellect. ParAsara has mentioned this in vishnupurana 'srooyathAm 
  chApyavidhyAyAh svarupam kulanandana; anAthmani AthmabuddhiryA' (VP.6-
  7-10) "Hear the nature of avidhyA;it is the notion of athma in 
  anAthma."`
  Ramanuja says 'yadhi jnapthimAthramEva AthmA thadhAanAthmani 
  AthmAbhimAne jnapthimAthraprathibhAsah syAth; na 
  jnAthrthvaprathibhasah.' If anubhuthi is the self then in the 
  perception of 'I' in the body etc. will be mere anubhuthi and not as 
  a knower.Therefore 'I', the knower alone is Athma. To quote 
  YAmunAchArya 'athah prathyaksha siddhathvAthukthanyAyAgamAnvayAth 
  avidhyA yogathaschAthmA jnAthAham ithi bhAsathE.(Athmasiddhi) The 
  Athma, knower, shines as 'I' and this is proved by perception 
  inference and sruthi and the effect of ignorance as pointed 
  out.'Dehendhriya manafprAnadheebhyOanyOanayasAdhanah nithyO vyApee 
  prathikshethramAthmA bhinnah svathah sukhee.'(Athmasiddhi) The Athma 
  is other than body,senses, mind, prAna and intellect and is self-
  proved, eternal all pervading,separate in each body and happy by 
  nature.Here vyApee means the most subtle nature capable of entering 
  into all beings. 



   

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/6pRQfA/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/XUWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Oppiliappan/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Oppiliappan-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
oppiliappan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list