[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: avidya vs maayaa - What is the difference? - Part 4

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Chandramouliji
I was referring to Vichara Sagara, anirvachanIya khyAti section.
Yes, you are right. My usage was loose. What I intended to say was that the
avidya located within the vritti avacchinna chaitanyam leads to jnAna
adhyAsa (sarpa jnAna) and the avidyA located within the vastu avacchinna
chaitanyam leads to artha adhyAsa (sarpa).

Regards
Venkatraghavan


On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 12:34 PM, H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Sri Venkatraghavan Ji,
>
>
>
> This is reg your observation  << If the perceiver's thought is not able
> to remove the inert rope-ignorance
> fully, that un-removed ignorance which also has the vikshepa shakti,
> creates the projection of the snake where the rope exists. The
> consciousness enclosed within the perceiving thought takes the form of the
> projected snake, leading to the erroneous conclusion, "I see a snake
> there". So each adhyAsa is actually two fold - one of the snake, which is
> the arthAdhyAsa, and the thought "I see a snake there", which is
> jnAnAdhyAsa. >>,
>
>
>
> I presume you are explaining as per Vedanta Paribhasha. Assuming so, I
> think the explanation is not exactly right. The consciousness associated
> with the perceiver’s thought (antahkarana vritti ) takes the form of only
> “It” referring to the object (rope ) and not the rope itself since it is
> not uncovered fully. It does not take the form of the projected snake
> because there is no snake to be perceived. That is why the part “ It is “
> in “ It is a snake “ is termed “pramatru bhasya”. The avidya located in the
> chaitanya associated with the snake (rajju avachinna chaitanyashrita avidya
> ) which you have termed “unremoved ignorance “ is disturbed by this partial
> removal of the rope ignorance and  generates a vritti ( termed avidya
> vritti ) which is responsible for projecting both the snake (arthadhyasa)
> and the knowledge concerning the snake (jnanadhyasa ) simultaneously. And
> this jnanadhyasa is illumined by the Sakshi directly and is termed “ Sakshi
> Bhasya “. Thus the total knowledge  “It is a snake “ is partially due to
> pramatru bhasya ( requiring the help of sense organs for knowledge )  and
> partially due to Sakshi bhasya ( which does not require the help of sense
> organs for knowledge ).
>
>
>
> Just thought I should help set the record straight. Not to intervene in
> your discussion. Hope you don’t mind.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> .
>