[Advaita-l] Debunking Drishti-Srishti Vada and Eka Jiva Vada - part 1

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste Adityaji,

On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 12:41 AM, Aditya Kumar <kumaraditya22 at yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Yes, I too understand Advaita as expounded by Vachaspati Misra.
>

​If that, I am glad, but you are still sadly mistaken. Bhamatikara
Vachaspati Mishra accepts DSV with NJV not EJV. That is not to say that he
​is against DSV. Someone who has Bhamati reference for this may kindly
quote the same, since I haven't studied Bhamati text proper.

​As for tucchatvam, since you have ignored the perspective, it is no proof
and here's quotation from Bhashyakara using tucchatva example, which I
mentioned earlier and you don't seem to have landed on:

Under the Karika:
न निरोधो न चोत्पत्तिर्न बद्धो न च साधकः ।
न मुमुक्षुर्न वै मुक्त इत्येषा परमार्थता ॥ २.३२ ॥
There is neither creation nor dissolution, neither anyone bound nor seeker,
neither desirous of liberation nor liberated; this is the highest reality.

Bhashyakara says:
//
प्रकरणार्थोपसंहारार्थोऽयं श्लोकः — यदा वितथं द्वैतम् आत्मैवैकः परमार्थतः
सन्, तदा इदं निष्पन्नं भवति — सर्वोऽयं लौकिको वैदिकश्च व्यवहारोऽविद्याविषय
एवेति । This verse is for the purpose of summing up the entire section—
when the duality is false and being only one in reality, then this is
understood— “this entire group of worldly and Vedic transactions is indeed
based on अविद्या”।

तदा न निरोधः, निरोधनं निरोधः प्रलयः, उत्पत्तिः जननम्, बद्धः संसारी जीवः,
साधकः साधनवान्मोक्षस्य, मुमुक्षुः मोचनार्थी, मुक्तः विमुक्तबन्धः ।Then,
there is no dissolution, creation, transmigrating individual, one having
means of liberation, one desirous of liberation, liberated.

उत्पत्तिप्रलययोरभावाद्बद्धादयो न सन्तीत्येषा परमार्थता ।
Due to absence of creation and dissolution, those bound, etc, are not
there; this is the highest reality.

कथमुत्पत्तिप्रलययोरभाव इति, उच्यते — द्वैतस्यासत्त्वात् ।
How is there an absence of creation and dissolution? This doubt is being
answered— due to falsity
of duality.
//

This is a संग्रहवाक्य expanded further so after quoting many Shrutis.
Please read this carefully and tell me what you make of this tucchatva
example and then go ahead and refute Sw. Prakashananda.
//
सतो ह्युत्पत्तिः प्रलयो वा स्यात्, नासतः शशविषाणादेः । There can be
creation and dissolution of existent only, not of non-existent rabbit's
horn, etc.
//

In any case, I suggest you to study Mandukya with Karika before attacking
(#) DSV or its great proponents any which way. Else, stick to SDV, which is
also a great प्रक्रिया that leads to मोक्ष। If you use SDV, try to
logically land on एकमेवाद्वितीयब्रह्म without using dream example. If you
use a dream example, you will have unknowingly, reluctantly or helplessly
subscribed to DSV. This is my firm conclusion. :)


(​#)​ Any reduction of Vaidika perspective to shunyavAda is construed as an
attack since it is against श्रुतिमत।

gurupAdukAbhyAm,
--Praveen R. Bhat
/* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
That owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */