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

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

> 
> > again, I am failed to grasp your line of argument here...prabhuji, do 
> you think adhyAsa bhAshya is not the right source to understand shankara's 


I am saying that it is not the ONLY source to understand what
Sankara bhagavatpAda is saying. I am saying that one need not
be more rigidly dogmatic about the adhyAsa bhAshya than what
Sankara bhagavatpAda himself was. I am saying that one needs
to recognize that what the bhAshyakAra says about avidyA and
adhyAsa in other references should also be taken into account.
I am saying that one needs to recognize that that is an equally
valid (if not more valid) approach to understand what the
bhagavatpAda is saying.


I am saying that one needn't see contradictions or inconsistencies
in Sankara's works, explicitly or implicitly, and appeal to special
understandings and meanings of these other references, just
because they don't seem to fit in with the conclusions that one
draws from what one understands of the adhyAsa bhAshya. An
argument that the 'plain reading' of one or the other bhAshya
passage may compromise Atmaikatva and that a special meaning
should be imposed upon it is precisely that - an implicit statement
that the bhAshyakAra contradicts himself.


I fail to grasp why this seems so hard to grasp! I see no point in
continuing to debate the other statements you made, so I've
deliberately avoided them. I will only say that as far as I am 
concerned, bandha and moksha vicAra are not mutually exclusive
at all. Any deliberation on bandha is incomplete, futile and quite
unnecessary, unless there is an accompanying moksha-vicAra.

 

Regards,

Vidyasankar

     
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with Hotmail. 
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5