[Advaita-l] FW: ​Re: [advaitin] A talk on avidyA by Manjushree

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 6:54 PM H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Subrahmanian Ji,
>
> Reg  <<  I had asked before what are the exact, original, statements of
> the post-Shankara Advaitins that gave the impression to SSSS that the Mula
> Avidya is as real as Brahman, it could not go away by knowledge, etc. that
> made SSSS conclude that such an avidya would 'shatter the Advaitic Brahman
> to pieces' (implying that there will be duality and not non-duality)?
> Those exact statements, if provided, would help one to examine them and
> decide on the merits of SSSS's conclusions >>,
>
> I am giving reference to two texts by Sri SSS, one in kannada and the
> other one in Sanskrit which address your above question.
>
> First one in kannada, Commentary on BSB Appendix 2, link ref
>
> <<
> http://www.adhyatmaprakasha.org/php/bookreader/templates/book.php?type=kannada&book_id=101A_3&pagenum=0001#page/21/mode/1up
> >>
>
> Section 4, **Adhyasa is termed Avidya by Panditas**, Book page 18 onwards.
> On page 20, Sri SSS concludes, inter alia, as follows (lines 14 to 17).
>
> (Translation mine)  << Further, as per this argument, since AvidyA ,  the
> cause of AdhyAsa,  will not be an   AdhyAsa kArya, it  thereby  qualifies
> as an anadhyasta  or satya  entity. Then it will be false to term it
> jnAnavirOdhi >>.
>
> The second one in Sanskrit is from the text **Sugama** by Sri SSS. It is a
> detailed commentary on AdhyAsa Bhashya by Sri SSS. Most of the kannada text
>  mentioned  above is reflected here as well. It may therefore be useful for
> those who are not well versed in kannada.  Link ref
>
> <http://www.adhyatmaprakasha.org/php/bookreader/templates/book.php?type=sanskrit&book_id=008&pagenum=0016#page/67/mode/1up
> >
>
> Section 33. Conclusion of the refutation by Sri SSS on the statements of
> post-Shankara Advaitins  on the topic presented in the immediately
> preceding couple of  Sections.
>
> <<  अथाऽनध्यस्तः, तदा परमार्थ एव स्यान्न विद्यानिवर्त्य इत्यनिष्टमापद्यते
> । न चैवं शङ्क्यम् - अध्यासस्तत्संस्कारश्चेत्युभावप्यध्यस्तावेव ।  >>
>
> <<  athA.anadhyastaH, tadA paramArtha eva syAnna vidyAnivartya
> ityaniShTamApadyate | na chaivaM sha~Nkyam -
> adhyAsastatsaMskArashchetyubhAvapyadhyastAveva | >>
>
> The above portion reflects exactly the same sentiment as in the kannada
> version cited above.
>
Namaste

With regard  to the above Sanskrit text that you have cited I would like to
say the following:

In the Vedanta Paribhasha there occurs this passage in a discussion:   This
author is admitted to be a VivaraNa follower.

मूलाविद्याकार्यत्वपक्षे तु मूलाविद्याया ब्रह्मसाक्षात्कारमात्रनिवर्त्यतया

From this statement, which means Mulavidya is annulled by Brahma
sakshatkara alone, we come to know that the Mulavidya people have never
left the fate of this mulavidya to anybody's guess. It is explicitly stated
that this MV will cease to be once knowledge arises.

To the objection of Swamiji that if MVidya or whatever causes samsara
is not admitted to be something that is superimposed (अथाऽनध्यस्तः, तदा
परमार्थ एव स्यान्न विद्यानिवर्त्य इत्यनिष्टमापद्यते ।) (then it will have
to be deemed to exist forever and it will be something that is not
negated/sublated by Vidya) the reply is the above cited passage.

Thus it is very clear that the MulaVidya people also admit that such
Mulaavidya is only a superimposition. That is evident from the above usage:
jnana nivartya = that which is unsettled by knowlege.  There is nothing
wrong in holding so as the alternative explanation to the term
मिथ्याज्ञाननिमित्तः (mithyaajnaana nimittaH) of the adhyasa bhashya, which
is given as: mithya ca tadajnaanam ca = this ajnana that is itself mithya)
the causal ignorance is itself an anAdi superimposition which gives rise to
further superimposition...

This is in perfect agreement with the famous vartika of Sureshwaracharya:

तत्त्वमस्यादिवाक्योत्थसंयग्धीजन्ममात्रतः ।
*अविद्या सह कार्येण नासीदस्ति भविष्यति ॥ *

The Tattvamasi, etc. passages give rise to that knowledge which dispels the
avidya, along with its effects, which is non-existent in all the three
periods of time.

  It is only a case of not grasping the purport of the MV people and their
methods that SSS has embarked on a massive tirade against them.  All this
was uncalled for if only he had understood the post-Shankara Advaitins in
the proper perspective instead of hastily coming to conclusions.

warm regards
subbu







> Regards
>
>
>>
>>