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

[Aditya Kumar]

Namaste Venkateshji,
But Holenarsipur swami himself contradicts Shankara when he says that Avidya is nothing but mere Adhyasa. Further, I have glanced through some of his works. He is extremely disrespectful towards Mandana Misra, a trait often seen among scholars when they don't have a strong footing. 
On the contrary, DSV finds its roots in 'Brahman is the ashrya of Avidya' view. So one school attacks another, but if we try to dive deep, Misra's view appears rock solid. No dualist or non-dualist can challenge the view of Misra as he humbles them all with his Anirvachaniya weapon. 



      From: Venkatesh Murthy via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> 
Cc: Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com>
 Sent: Saturday, 22 July 2017 1:12 PM
 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Debunking Drishti-Srishti Vada and Eka Jiva Vada - part 1
   
Namaste

If you listen to the Pandita Maninas scholars they are saying Vacaspati
Misra also is following Mandana Misra only and not Adi Sankara. What do you
say to that? Vacaspati Misra has accepted Jeeva as the seat of Avidyaa just
like Mandana Misra. Adi Sankara did not say that. Vacaspati Misra has
accepted many Moola Avidyaas. This is a wrong idea because Adi Sankara did
not say that. Vacaspati Misra has rejected Sravana of Maha Vakya will give
Brahma Jnana. But he is saying you have to keep on doing Manana and
Nididhyasana and then only Jnana will be the result. Adi Sankara did not
say that but it is following Mandana Misra. Holenarsipur Swami's disciples
have written books to show Vacaspati Misra is going against Sankara
Bhashyas in many places. What then?

We should not listen to these Pandita Manina scholars like Modi and
Dasgupta but we have to follow Sampradaya. Then we will get correct
picture. Scholars will have different motivation like becoming famous. If a
scholar says simply everything is fine and there is no problem in any
Bhasya he will not become famous. But if he says Madhusudana or Vivarana
Acharya is not following Adi Sankara he will become famous.

When a Teekaakaara is writing something he has to add something to the
Guru's Bhashya to make it clear. He has to correct mistakes in the Bhashya.
He has to explain in better way. When he is doing this some silly people
will think he is changing and writing against the Bhashya. This is a wrong
opinion.



On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Aditya Kumar via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Thank you for sharing the interpretation of Shankara. So Shankara is
> categorically advocating SDV and it is consistent throughout all his other
> works. The interpretation of DSV from Shankara/Gaudapada's works by various
> people differs variously and sometimes contradictory (One DSVadin
> contradicts another DSVadin at many places). Hence also, there is
> absolutely no clarity as in which particular view is without ambiguity.
> Further, many scholars like P M Modi(not the minister) opine that
> Madhusudana clearly deviate from Shankara, quite boldly, which can be
> verified by reading his works like Gudarthadipika.
> Quoting P M Modi from the Introduction part of 'Siddhantabindu' English
> translation :-"To illustrate briefly, in Advaitsiddhi, Madhusndana has at
> various places differed from Sankaaracharya in his interpretation of the
> Brahmasutras which he has quoted. He is the only exception from among the
> Aeharyas of the Sankara Sehool of Vedanta, to differ from Sankara in this
> manner."
> "But in the Gndharthadipika he goes further and rejeets the view of
> Sankara altogether whenever , he found that it was not in harmony with the
> Bhaktimarga of the Gita."
> Here the author is talking about the fact that Madhusudhana Saraswati
> considers Bhakti Marga as a legitimate 3rd marga other than Jnana and
> karma. However, Shankara and the mainstream Advaita does not consider
> Bhakti marga as a path in itself like Jnana and Karma. Considering this, it
> is perhaps not surprising to see this interpretation of Tat Tvam Asi.
> Further, if we compare Madhusudana Saraswati and/or Prakasananda Saraswati
> with the likes of Vachaspati Mishra, in terms of how they explain the
> unreality of the world, it is clear that there is some radical difference
> in the approach. Where Misra focuses solely on Maya/Ajnana and proceeds to
> elaborate it in line with Shankara's explanation of Maya, MS and PS
> (needlessly) attempt to explain the unreality of the world purely from a
> logical stand point. For instance, the world which we perceive is because
> Ajnana projects the world and hides our intrinsic nature. The dream
> examples are mere illustrations to explain the concept of maya/ajnana.
> But MS and PS try to take the examples/illustrations itself as the proof
> or stretch them beyond it's sphere of application(as originally intended by
> the authors) and try to arrive at unreality logically. However, it is clear
> that whenever the logic fails or reaches it's limit, they inevitably rely
> on the Sruti statements of abheda nature. When eventually, you had to rely
> solely on sruti, what was the need to explain it solely from a logical
> point of view? In doing so, both these persons have stretched the
> illustrations beyond it's application and used the same as proof. This is
> same like various schools of Buddhists.
>
>      From: Anand Hudli via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> >
>  To: "advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
> vedanta.org>
> Cc: Anand Hudli <anandhudli at hotmail.com>
>  Sent: Friday, 21 July 2017 10:26 AM
>  Subject: [Advaita-l] Debunking Drishti-Srishti Vada and Eka Jiva Vada -
> part 1
>
> >Can the phrase 'Tat Tvam Asi' be interpreted based on our personal
> preference or should it be interpreted based on what Uddalaka said to
> Shvetaketu in the context of Chandogya? Can the Mahavakyas have multiple
> implied meanings? Aren't the two interpretations >different from each
> other? Did Shankara interpret 'Tat Tvam Asi' in this fashion?
> >Isn't it clear that Madhusudana Saraswati, in an attempt to prove DSV
> re-interpreted the mahavakya, thus thereby differing from Shankara?
>
> This goes back to the fundamental question whether GaudapAda and Shankara
> support DSV or not, and has been answered in the affirmative before. Please
> consult the archives and posts in this thread too. Regarding the
> interpretation of "tattvamasi" mahAvAkya, Shankara has alluded to
> jahadajahallakShaNa (without mentioning the term) as per SDV in the
> brahmasUtra bhAShya, for example 2.1.22. ‘ तत्त्वमसि’ इत्येवंजातीयकः ; कथं
> भेदाभेदौ विरुद्धौ सम्भवतः ? नैष दोषः, महाकाशघटाकाशन्यायेनोभयसम्भवस्य तत्र
> तत्र प्रतिष्ठापितत्वात् । अपि च यदा ‘ तत्त्वमसि’
> इत्येवंजातीयकेनाभेदनिर्देशेनाभेदः प्रतिबोधितो भवति ; अपगतं भवति तदा जीवस्य
> संसारित्वं ब्रह्मणश्च स्रष्टृत्वम् , समस्तस्य मिथ्याज्ञानविजृम्भितस्य
> भेदव्यवहारस्य सम्यग्ज्ञानेन बाधितत्वात् ; तत्र कुत एव सृष्टिः कुतो वा
> हिताकरणादयो दोषाः । Shankara says the creatorship of Brahman, (the
> "tat"pada) and the saMsAritva and other defects of the jIva, (the
> "tvam"pada) will be removed through the "tattvamasi" vAkya. Obviously, the
> tatpada cannot be associated with creatorship in the context of DSV, since
> the jIva is the creator, nor can the tatpada be associated with any of the
> attributes such as sarvajnatva, etc., since it is admitted that the jIva
> imagines Ishvara and the world as in a dream. This is what Madhusudana
> describes.
>
> Anand
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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