[Advaita-l] Advaita and Madhyamika Buddhism

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Sri Praveen Ji,



Reg  << I have trouble seeing what the author means with the last line;
while the concepts of shUnya and avidyA being compared, why has he suddenly
landed on concept of shUnya and concept of avidyA *nivRtti*? >>,



Perhaps this is covered in detail in the body of the text Shatabhushani, as
well as in Ishta Sidhi ant its commentary. However I think what is being
stated is that according to Madhyamikas sunya is applicable to both
Consciousness
and Creation, reality being denied to both, avidya of advaita  refers to
Creation only and by avidya nivRtti, reality is denied to Creation only,
Consciousness as its adhishthanam being the sole remainder.



Ofcourse  this is just my understanding based on other inputs and not an
understanding of Shatabhushani itself which I am yet to read.



Regards

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Sri Praveenji,
> I believe he is referring to the work "advaita makaranda"  by AnandabodhAchArya
> which postulates that avidyA nivritti is a fifth category which does not
> belong to any of the other four. Sastrigal is saying shUnyam, which is not
> any of these four also, is not same as avidyA nivritti either.
>
> Regards
> Venkatraghavan
>
> On 30 Mar 2017 2:34 a.m., "Praveen R. Bhat" <bhatpraveen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Namaste Chandramouliji,
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 4:24 PM, H S Chandramouli <
>> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> << Unlike other critics Sri Vedanta Desika has understood the nature of
>>> sunya correctly as neither bhava nor abhava nor both nor neither, bhava
>>> abhava vilakshanam. Sri Desika contends that avidya is tantamount to the
>>> Madhyamika theory of sunya. It is to be noted that no advaitic work from
>>> the time of Anandabodhacharya has replied to this charge. But the earlier
>>> work, Ishta Sidhi and its commentary, have raised this question and
>>> provided the answer. In claiming this criticism as original to himself, Sri
>>> Vedanta Desika has either not seen the reference to it in Ishta Sidhi or
>>> has ignored the answer provided in it. There is a fundamental difference
>>> between the concept of sunyam and the concept of avidya nivrtti.
>>>
>>
>> ​I have trouble seeing what the author means with the last line; while
>> the concepts of shUnya and avidyA being compared, why has he suddenly
>> landed on concept of shUnya and concept of avidyA *nivRtti*?
>>
>> About the rest of it, I do agree that there is a difference considering
>> shUnya's apratyogitvam as claimed by Buddhists. Having said that, in
>> Chandogyopanishad, where the Shruti Herself quotes Vainashika pakSha with
>> the mantra "asadevedam agra AsIt", Bhashyakara and Tikakaras say that there
>> cannot be a talk of complete non-absence, meaning without the pratiyogi of
>> bhAva, abhAva cannot be talked about. This Siddhanta objection will apply
>> to Mahavainashikas=Buddhists as well.
>>
>> ​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] */
>> ​
>>
>