[Advaita-l] Mandana Mishra

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

>
> Sri Subhanu Saxena said there is a separation of Avidya Upadana argument
> and Adhyaropa Apavada.
>
> >  correct, so it is clear that what shankara taught is based on
> adhyArOpaapavAda and what separates from this method is advidyOpadAna
> vAda.  That means those who,  teaching avidyOpadAna kAraNa vAda,  are not
> the followers of shankara's adhyArOpaapavAda vAda, and that school which
> is propagated avidyOpadAna has alter become panchapAdika vivaraNaM, this
> is what Sri subhAnu prabhuji said. Is it not??
>
> Where he said the two arguments are opposing?
>
> >  if you are finding any samanvaya between these two different view
> points, you are welcome to educate me.
>
This is Adhyaropa Apavada from Sri Subrahmanian's web page -
http://www.advaita.org.uk/discourses/teachers/adhyaropa_subrahmanian.htm

Stage 1. The pot is presented as the effect of clay.
Stage 2. Clay is presented as the cause of the pot.
Stage 3. Now, the teacher asks me to find out if I can see the pot without
the clay. I look at the pot on all sides and conclude that everywhere it is
clay alone. It is not available as different from clay, its cause. The
conclusion: the effect is non-different from the cause.
Stage 4. This much is not enough, for the concept of cause and effect does
exist. Now the teacher states that since it was concluded that the effect
does not exist apart from the cause, it would be correct to hold that the
cause alone really exists. But this still limits the cause as a cause. The
vision born of wisdom is: There is no longer any need to call the clay as
the cause. As clay alone matters in that wise vision, it would be
appropriate to divest the clay of its status of a cause. Thus, divested of
this status, clay remains as the one that transcends the cause-effect
duality.

Adhyaropa Apavada is saying

This is Avidya Upadana Vada

Stage 1. The pot is presented as Clay. The clay horse is presented as Clay.
The Clay cart is presented as Clay.
Stage 2. The same Clay is appearing with different Name and Form like Pot,
Horse and Cart.
Stage 3. The Name and Form of Clay are Avidya because if you take out Name
and Form all are Clay only. All are Clay. Only Clay is existing. There is
no Pot, Horse and Cart.

The Name and Form have Avidya as Cause. This Avidya is the Moola Avidya.
But Jnana of Clay will cancel the Moola Avidya and its Effect like Names
and Forms. The Person with Jnana will see only Clay but not Horse, Cart and
Pot.

Both Adhyaropa Apavada and Avidya Upadana have same result. Everything is
Clay. Only Clay is existing.




>
> How Avidya Upadana can be opposite of Adi Sankara Mata?
>
> > if the avidya upAdAna vAda is not different from shankara's adhyArOpa
> apavAda vAda, then there was no need for any 'separation' between these
> two view points.
>
> We should not make conclusions in hurry.
>
> >  I think conclusion i.e. avidyOpadAna kAraNa is not alien to shankara
> siddhAnta is a hurried one.  Anyway, I welcome your reconciliation between
> these two points...After all we don't want fight forever :-))
>
Kindly see above example.


>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>



-- 
Regards

-Venkatesh