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

[Aditya Kumar]

Yes sir, indeed. Prapancha is not seen as either objective or subjective or absolutely unreal like hare's horn or like an illusion. Here dvaita denotes perception. So dvaita prapancha means world which is nothing but perception. 
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad II-iv-14: Because when there is duality, as it were, then one smells something, one sees something, one hears something, one speaks something, one thinks something, one knows something. (But) when to the knower of Brahman everything has become the self, then what should one smell and through what, what should one see and through what, what should one hear and through what, what should one speak and through what, what should one think and through what, what should one know and through what ? Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known - through what, O Maitreyi, should one know the Knower ?"
Hence in GK, when Gaudapada says world is unreal, he means perception/duality is unreal. This is different from saying objects are merely projected by jiva or establishing the unreality of world by myriad of Bhramas. In both cases, there is perception. This is the uniqueness of paramartha/vedanta/anirvachaniya concept. 

      From: V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
 To: Aditya Kumar <kumaraditya22 at yahoo.com> 
Cc: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>; Anand Hudli <anandhudli at hotmail.com>
 Sent: Sunday, 23 July 2017 12:06 AM
 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Debunking Drishti-Srishti Vada and Eka Jiva Vada - part 1
   


On 22 Jul 2017 23:48, "Aditya Kumar" <kumaraditya22 at yahoo.com> wrote:




Where has Shankara said the above? How do you link the above to Shankara's Advaita.  
A : Please refer BSB 2-2-28 and 2-2-29. I have merely restated it.


On the other hand Shankara has said in the Mandukya bhashya beginning:

यस्य द्वैतप्रपञ्चस्योपशमे अद्वैतप्रतिपत्तिः रज्ज्वामिव सर्पादिविकल्पोपशमे रज्जुतत्त्वप्रतिपत्तिः, तस्य द्वैतस्य हेतुतो वैतथ्यप्रतिपादनाय द्वितीयं प्रकरणम् ।


...The second chapter is to establish the unreality of duality through reasoning. 
A : Please refer verse 4,6,11,12 from Vaitathya prakararana. In this prakarana, Gaudapada is not establishing the unreality of  external objects/world or internal ideas. He is saying _perception itself establishes unreality_ by using dream as an _analogy_. Put in other words, he is explaining how sad-asad-vilakshana is unreal from the absolute position as he speaks from paramartha view. He is merely elaborating on the 'indescribable nature' of the world from absolute view. Unlike other later Advaitins who reduced this concept of sad-asad-vilakshana to subjective idealism or at times unreality of external objects.Again, Asat-khyatis - External objects are unreal. Hence unreal.           Atma-khyatis - Objects are merely ideas. Hence unreal.           Vedantin/Gaudapada - Perception itself establishes unreality. This is nothing but, in paramartha, even sad-asad-vilakshana is unreal and does not remain as a separate category.  

In the beginning of the second chapter again Shankara says:

‘ज्ञाते द्वैतं न विद्यते’ इत्युक्तम् ‘एकमेवाद्वितीयम्’ (छा. उ. ६ । २ । १) इत्यादिश्रुतिभ्यः । आगममात्रं तत् । तत्र उपपत्त्यापि द्वैतस्य वैतथ्यं शक्यतेऽवधारयितुमिति द्वितीयं प्रकरणमारभ्यते — वैतथ्यमित्यादिना ।


In the first chapter with shruti base, the non-existence of duality has been established. That was merely on the basis of the veda. The second chapter is commenced as even by reasoning the unreality of dvaita can be established.
A : Unreality of duality, not unreality of objective world. Hope you appreciate the difference. 


Shankara makes no difference between the two: dvaita and dvaitaprapancha: you can see both the words here:

माण्डूक्योपनिषद्भाष्यम्
………। किं पुनस्तत्प्रयोजनमिति, उच्यते — रोगार्तस्येव रोगनिवृत्तौ स्वस्थता, तथा दुःखात्मकस्यात्मनो द्वैतप्रपञ्चोपशमे स्वस्थता ; अद्वैतभावः प्रयोजनम् । द्वैतप्रपञ्चस्य चाविद्याकृतत्वाद्विद्यया तदुपशमः स्यादिति ब्रह्मविद्याप्रकाशनाय अस्यारम्भः क्रियते । ‘यत्र हि द्वैतमिव भवति’ (बृ. उ. २ । ४ । १४), (बृ. उ. ४ । ५ । १५) ‘यत्र वान्यदिव स्यात्तत्रान्योऽन्यत्पश्येदन्योऽन्यद्विजानीयात्’ (बृ. उ. ४ । ३ । ३१) ‘यत्र त्वस्य सर्वमात्मैवाभूत्तत्केन कं पश्येत्तत्केन कं विजानीयात्’ (बृ. उ. ४ । ५ । १५) इत्यादिश्रुतिभ्योऽस्यार्थस्य सिद्धिः । तत्र तावदोङ्कारनिर्णयाय प्रथमं प्रकरणमागमप्रधानमात्मतत्त्वप्रतिपत्त्युपायभूतम् । यस्य द्वैतप्रपञ्चस्योपशमे अद्वैतप्रतिपत्तिः रज्ज्वामिव सर्पादिविकल्पोपशमे रज्जुतत्त्वप्रतिपत्तिः, तस्य द्वैतस्य हेतुतो वैतथ्यप्रतिपादनाय द्वितीयं………
vs

So, there is mindful logic indulged in by Shankara. In the Advaitasiddhi specific Advaita shruti vakyas have been discussed in detail and thus, there is no 'indulging in mindless logic'. 

Thus, the case of PM Modi is without any substance.