[Advaita-l] The Treatment of Avidya in Advaita - Part 1

[savithri devaraj]

> The Treatment of Avidya in Advaita
> 
> Avidya is ignorance.  What does this mean?  In
> the adhyAsa bhashya the
> Acharya has said:
> 
> 1, //Tametam evam-lakshanam-adhyasam panditAH avidyeti
> manyante.
> Tadvivekena vastu-svarUpAvadhAraNam vidyAmAhuH.//
> 
> A little later, in this document itself He says:
> 
> 2. //adhyAso nAma atasminstadbuddhirityavochAma//
> 
> Now, here it appears that the Acharya has given a
> definition of Avidya.  In
> simple terms Avidya = adhyasa.  AdhyAsa is normally
> translated as
> ‘misapprehension’, wrong cognition, viparIta
> pratipatti, etc.  The main idea
> is that adhyasa means seeing/mistaking one thing in the
> place of another.
> For example: Mistaking nacre to be silver.
> 
> This is not the only place the Acharya has given us what He
> means by
> Avidya.  For example in the Bhagavadgita Bhashyam
> (13.2) He says:
> 
> 3 (1) //tAmaso hi pratyayaH AvaraNaatmakatvAd-avidyA
> viparIta-graahakaH,
> samshayopasthaapako vA, agrahaNAtmako vA//
> 
>  Here  itself, in a subsequent sentence He says:
> 
> 3 (2)// tAmase cha AavaraNaatmake timirAdi-doShe sati
> agrahaNAderavidyA-trayasya upalabdheH.//
> 
> In the Mandukya kArikaa bhashya (I.16) He says:
> 
> 4. //tattva-apratibodha-rUpena bIjAtmanA,
> anyathAgrahaNalakshaNena cha,
> anAdikAlapravRttena MAyalakshanena….//
> 
> In the Shvetashvataropanishad bnashya (Not agreed by all to
> be of
> Bhagavatpada), in the upodghaata it is said:
> 
> 5. //chitsadAnanda-advitIya-*brahmasvabhAvo’pyAtmA
> svAshryayA sva-vishayayA
> avidyayA *svAnubhavagamyayA sAbhAsayA
> pratibaddha-svAbhAvikaashesha-purushArthaH…//
> 
> 6. In the Brihadaranyakopanishad bhashya (I.iv.10) He
> writes:
> 
> //ato brahmavidyAyAm satyAm avidyA-kArya-anupapatteH,
> pradIpa iva
> tamaH-kAryasya. //
> 
> In the Brihadaranyakopanishad bhashya (I.iv.17) He writes:
> 
> 6. //vastu-svarUpa-AvaranAtmikA hi sA (avidyA). 
> pravartakabIjam tu
> pratipadyate andhatvamiva gartAdipravartana-hetuH. 
> svAbhAvikyAm avidyAyAm
> vartamAnAh bAlaaH..//
> 
> A little later in this very bhashyam He says:
> 
> 7. //svAbhaavikyA svAtmani
> kartrAdi-kAraka-kriyA-phalaatmakataa-adhyAropaNa-lakshaNayA
> avidyA-vAsanayA
> vAsitaH so-akAmayata kAmitavAn//**
> 
> In the Bhashyam for the Gita verse 15.3, we find a
> separation made by the
> Acharya between avidya-effect (vikshepa shakti) and
> avidya-cause (avarana
> shakti):  While describing the samsara tree, He says:
> na rUpamasya iha
> …..svapna
> mareechyudaka-mAyA-gandharvanagara-samatvAt….[This is the
> standard
> ‘manifest’ form of avidya clearly bringing out the
> ‘atasmin tad buddhiH’
> definition of adhyAsa.  It is this that is popularly
> termed as ‘vikshepa
> shakti’ of avidya. ]  The Acharya concludes this
> bhashyam by saying ‘asanga
> shastreNa chitvaa samsAravRkSham sa-beejam-uddhRtya’.
> [Here He says that the
> samsara tree seen in all its manifest form
> (adhyAsa/vikshepa) is to be cut
> along with its root/beejam.  Actually, the word
> ‘moolam’ translates to
> ‘root’/cause, etc. The Gita context is: ‘the samsara
> tree, the product of
> the  primordial ignorance, moola avidya, has to be
> ‘uprooted’ in order to
> gain liberation.’ This brings out the special
> significance of the bhashyam:
> sa-beejam.. This beejam is the cause of the
> adhyasa/vikshepa and is what is
> called ‘aavarana’.  The Acharya has said in the
> Brahmasutra bhashya:
> ‘avidyaiva naH shaktiH’, meaning ‘avidyA itself is
> the Power for us (the
> Vedantins).  Thus, it is only based on the Acharya’s
> statements regarding
> avidya, AvaraNa, adhyasa, tamas, beeja, moola, shakti,
> etc.,  spread across
> the PrasthAna traya Bhashyas that the later Advaita
> Acharyas have talked
> about the Avarana (concealing) shakti and the Vikshepa
> (projecting/multiplicating) shakti as pertaining to
> ajnAna.]
> 
> In the ‘Upadesha sAhasrI’, a work agreed to be
> genuinely of the Acharya, we
> find the use of the word ‘vikshepa’ in the verse
> XIII.14.  The word ‘beejam’
> is used in the verses: XVII.26,27,28.
> 
> This list, which obviously shows a variety of
> meanings/senses for the word
> ‘avidyaa’, tells us that *it would be improper* to
> conclude that ‘the
> Acharya has given a complete and comprehensive definition
> of avidya in the
> adhyAsa Bhashya by saying that the term ‘avidya’ 
> *connotes adhyasa alone**’
> * by considering the adhyAsa Bhashya in isolation.
> 


This is flawed thinking and ignoring shankara's dictum in my humble opinion.
 
As is well known, the prasthAnatraya are three journeys - upanishads being the sruti prasthAna, gIta being the smruti prasthAna and brahmasUtras being the nyAya prasthAna. brahmasUtras were mainly written by vyAsa to bring about one voice and unity in the teachings of the upanishads, and to make it easier for his disciples to remember the essense of the upanishads in short sUtras. This being the case, I would say the sUtra prasthAna has more authority on the meaning of avidya/adhyAsa than the possible different meanings in the different upanishads from different rishis at different times. 

In addition, Acharya shankara found it necessary to write the adhyAsa bhAshya in the begining of his brahmasUtra bhAshya specifically to emphasize this uniform meaning of adhyAsa/avidya in the upanishads. Don't you think this is significant? We have to respect that and study the upanishads from this perspective only. He concludes adhyAsa bhAshya thus - "asyAnarthahetoH prahANAya atmaikatva vidyA pratipattaye sarve vedAnta Arabhyante| yathA cAyamarthaH sarveSAm vedAntAnAm tathA vayamasyAm sArirakamImAmsAyAm pradarshayiShAmaH |" This blunder (mutual super imposition of Atma-anAtma) is the cause of all world delusion. All upanishads begin to destroy this ignorance completely and teach self knowledge. We will proceed to show how this is understood to be the central teaching of all upanishads through this sArirakamImAmsa. [Translation is mine]

Enough said. This must be sufficient to conclude adhyAsa = avidya in all upanishads?

Regards,
Savithri