[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Shankara accepts BhAvarUpa ajnana BSB 4.1.15

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Sudhanshu prabhuji
Hare Krishna

sarva is a product of avidyA.


  *   Fundamental problem here 😊 sarva is not the product of avidyA because for sarva brahman is the abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa hence there is shruti satyanchaanrutaM cha satyamabhavat yadidaM kiMcha, tatsarvaM satyamabhavat.  Let that be aside, definitely I don’t think ‘sarva’ that includes scholars like Sri Sudhanshu prabhuji is the product of my avidyA 😊

To aver sarva-AtmatA, there has to be perception of sarva. That is admissible only in SDV wherein avidyA-lesha has to be admitted to enable perception of sarva.


Ø     Seeing the sarvaM is not avidyA but seeing the difference in sarva is asarvAtmabhAva due to avidyA i.e. looking and treating the jagat as abrahman, asarvaM, parichinnam.

sarvAtma-bhAva is admissible only in SDV. As per DSV, this is arthavAda.


Ø     When DSV has nothing to offer (with only avidyA pratibimbita jeeva and nothing else) with regard to mOksha, paramArtha jnana and failed to do any sort of samanvaya in shruti, yukti and anubhava,  don’t you think what is there in shruti and bhAshya would be more appropriate to follow ??  We are just doing that.

Moksha is removal of avidyA by jnAna. That is the singular definition applicable across all models be it SDV or DSV.


  *   I agree prabhuji 😊

In SDV, there is perception of sarva after Moksha which makes the description arthavAda.


  *   Whether it is arthavAda or paripUrNa jnana let us not decide.  But I am happy that you agreed that  in SDV, the ‘mOksha’ is possible, we can always discuss the ‘nature’ of perception in SDV ‘after mOksha’ 😊

In DSV, there is no perception post-Moksha, and hence there is nothing in Shruti regarding DSV post-jnAna which can be said to be arthavAda.


  *   If I am right you said in DSV there is no jnAni either and ONLY jeeva,  so no question of ‘post-moksha’ in DSV is it not?? Anyway given that there is mOksha prasanga in DSV, do you want to say post mOksha jeeva stops imagining things to say ‘there is no perception’??

In ajAtivAda, there is no Moksha, no bandha.


  *   Yes, because there no mumukshu no jignAsu it is the state there exists only existence i.e. brahman.

It is not that SDV or DSV is being stated as arthavAda. It is the description of state of Mukta which is stated as arthavAda.


Ø     Not get it properly, more elaboration required.  The description of muktAvastha has been explained as ‘avidAnivruttiH’ and as a result of this vidyA we realizes that which is there in ‘All’ the same is in me also.  This is not my declaration, bhAshyakAra himself says it is the verdict of shruti :  tasyaiva vidyayA AptiryathA tathA shrutyupadishtasya ‘ sarvAtmabrahmaNa Atmatvadarshanena’ vidyayaa tadaaptiH upapadyata eva.  You can be rest assured that arthavaada which you are treating something inferior to that final realization is depicted as mOkshAvastha by both shruti and bhAshya.  Vidya here means ‘seeing’ what is existing and not creating anything that is NOT existing.  And also jnana does not erase anything that is already existing.


 //And what is the nature of that jeeva ?? //
It is defined as avidyA-pratibimbita-chaitanya.

  *   OK, so, in DSV, the definition of jeeva’s nature is APC and in this module there is no chance for this APC to become jnAni rather realizing the jnana!!  Is it correct?? Or you can correct me.
There is no contradiction. All concepts are well presented. BhAshya statements are within the framework of SDV. You should also see the contradiction between pAnchabhautika-srishTi and waking=dream. They are mutually exclusive depiction of world.

  *   Yes, we have to wake up from dream to judge the status of dream, likewise we have to be awaken to the state from which we can adjudge the reality of this waking world or jagat in general. Till that time any judgement about the jagat is erroneous observes bhAshyakAra.
Sir, this is really hilarious. Deha is a product of avidyA.

Ø     Sorry to disappoint you, deha is panchabhUtAtmika for which triguNAtmika prakruti is the upAdAna kAraNa. And dehAtma buddhi is avidyA.   And in our books mAya and avidyA are not synonymous.  Anyway,  you are welcome to laugh at it.
Sarva is a product of avidyA. It is simple.

Ø     Again, sarva is the product of mAya, it is brahman’s undefinable power.  Sarva is the ‘vishesha darshana’ of that power and there is no difference between the shakti and shaktivanta.  Sarvashaktitva (omnipotence and omniscience) is the very nature  (svabhAva) of brahman.  See the introduction to Itareya shruti & su.bh. 1-1-5 for more details.
Without avidyA, how are you postulating deha for jnAnI?

Ø     Yes, it is through our (ajnAni-s) avidyA we are postulating deha for the jnAni.  But jnAni’s jnana is :  ashareeratvameva mOkshAkhyaM….mOkshAkhyaM ashareeratvaM nityamiti siddhaM…says bhAshyakAra in samanvayAdhikaraNa bhAshya.
That avidyA-lesha is not contradictory to jnAna has been well explained in bhAshya within SDV framework.

  *   I am afraid these are mere statements and do not serve any purpose to conclude anything meaningful. What is the nature of avidyAlesha here??  Does bhAshyakAra anywhere uses this term to clarify that AL will be there but it will not come in the way of jnana??  I don’t think so.  avidyAlesha is the invention of later vyAkhyAnakAra-s.  what is the kArya of vidyA??  vidyAyAscha kAryaM sarvAtmabhAvaH pradarshitOvidyAyA viparyayeNa.  sA chAvidyA nAtmanaH svAbhAvikO dharmaH…So, in this sense what is avidyAlesha when vidyA ‘completely annihilates the avidyA??  If at all some traces of this avidyA how vidyA will be paripUrNa and dOsha vinirmukta??  Can the same person with same mind can have the jnana that it is rope and ajnAna that it is snake??  tasmAnna vidyAyaM satyAM avidyAsaMbhavOsti clarifies bhAshyakAra.  If this AL not at all relevant to that notorious avidyA and not at all an hindrance to jnana,  why on the earth there is a prefix to this ‘lesha’ as avidyA??  Have we ever given any thought to it??
PrArabdha itself is product of avidyA sir. How can it remain when avidyA is not there.

  *   So you mean to say to literally eradicate avidyA completely praarabdha karma janita shareera should not be there!!??  In other words, to get the complete fruit of jnana one has to shed his mortal coil.  Till that time the jnana what he is having is gauNa, kevalArthavAda and mOksha and mukti happens ONLY after physical death.
again, this deha and that deha and the idea of sarva itself is product of avidyA. If avidyA is completely annihilated, this deha, that deha and sarva cannot be there.

Ø     Yes, to convey this ultimate truth only shruti saying all this.  By saying left, right, top bottom shruti does not saying ‘see the gap’ and say that, it is saying sarvaM in its entirety without any gaps 😊
Simple. These are valid in SDV only.

  *   And in DSV no scope for the jnAni and in AV there is no need to talk anything about these things…so what are you trying to convey here??  I am not able to understand.
 The concept of "was", "is" itself is product of avidyA. JnAnI entertaining these ideas is not possible without avidyA. That is acceptable in SDV but not in DSV. Depictions of "paramArtha-jnAnI" are considered as arthavAda in DSV.

  *   I don’t think I have to repeat what I have already said above.
 Sir ji. World is a product of avidyA.

Ø     Prabhuji world is brahman but brahman is not world.  Bangle (kArya) is gold (kAraNa) but gold is NOT bangle, bangle existence depends on gold but gold as kAraNa can exist without any dependencies.
If he continues to see the world, then avidyA continues to exist.

Ø     He will continue to see the world as NOT world but as brahman, you name it whatever you want.  He is anna, annada and shlokakarta and if you want to see the gap among these please note that is also brahman.  Hence it is called paripUrNa darshana, bedha buddhi rahita sarvAtma bhAva.
Brahman being immutable cannot appear as chair and table.

Ø     Hence the mAya concept introduced and in jagat srushti prakriya it is explained as brahmAnanya.  Hope you are aware of the bhAshya reference where bhAshyakAra explains how brahman being nirupAdhika, nishkriya as jagadeka kAraNaM.
avidyA appears as chair and table and being superimposed in Brahman, Brahman is said to be the upAdAna of world and not in the literal sense. Table and chair being Brahman contradict B's immutability.

  *   When we say wood appearing as chair and table we don’t say wood undergo changes and become chair and table 😊
And hence the immutability of Brahman goes for a toss. sarvam khalvidam Brahman is bAdha-sAmAnAdhikaraNya. That has already been discussed.

  *   The kArya kAraNa ananyatvaM needs to be understood in the sense that multiplicity is not the inherent nature of the Jagat OTOH its inherent nature is ONLY its material cause.  Hence for the jagat brahman is upAdAna and he is the antaryAmi as well.
This is all unacceptable because of immutability of Brahman.

Ø     Before sweeping all these under the carpet and declaring unacceptable, see what bhAshyakAra clarifies with regard to these issues.
Brahman cannot appear as anything. Simple. All appearance is due to avidyA which is adhyasta in Brahman.

Ø     I am afraid, switching the standpoints illogically does not serve any purpose in siddhAnta nirNaya.  When you realize everything is adhyasta and the whole prakriya is adhyArOpita in brahman no need to categorize various modules and grade them and there these verbal gymnastics are absolute unnecessary.
Sarva is Brahman is a statement of bAdha-sAmAnAdhikaraNya. Please don't start thinking that Brahman is appearing like chair and table in your front and back. That is against immutability.

  *   Ayyo raama !!  😊 Already clarified above,  there is no need to repeat.
If you posit perception post-jnAna, avidyAlesha is admitted. If you posit non-perception, this is DSV. Here avidyAlesha and prArabdha are not admitted.

  *   And ONLY avidyA pratibimbita jeeva admitted in DSV is it??
BhAshyakAra ke words ko thoda samajhna bhi padega na.

Ø     Vo samajneke liye hum ko chaahiye bhAshya reference only and not whims and fancy theories.
He says Brahman is upAdAna and is immutable. What does it mean? It is through ajnAna.

  *   This is the result of reading between the lines of bhAshya.  By any chance if you have time please refer 1-1-2 in detail.
 There is no jnAnI as such to decode his behaviour and him attaining something supernatural. Everything is my imagination. Ramana, VasisTha, Shankara are my imaginations.

Ø     And their upadesha is also your imagination, shAstra jnana bodhaka vAkya-s too your imagination, the socalled vidyA / mOksha too your imagination and Bhaskar ( me) who is talking to vidwan Sri SudhAnshu both are imagination in the mysterious mind of some avidyA pratibimbita jeeva.  Should I say this looks more hilarious than brahma jagatkAraNa.  If all and sundry just your imagination and when you have control over the things what you are imagining, please imagine all in the world are already realized and you are also realized so that  there is no need to talk to anyone on any topic of vedAnta…since all are just imaginations.
What supernatural would my imaginations attain? In my dreams also, there were many jnAnIs appearing. It proves nothing. Moksha is awakening from this dream. From the dream perspective, if it is supernatural, so be it.

Ø     And to get that mOksha, Acharya and Ishwaraanugraha required.  And till you get that mOksha you have to accept that mahatma-s are graced this earth and given the directions and it is not just your fanciful imagination.
I have written a little freely. Apologies if I sounded harsh somewhere.

  *   It is OK as you are not stranger to me…me and you are different vibrations in your kaMpana theory 😊
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar