[Advaita-l] [advaitin] How jnAnAbhAva can cause adhyAsa !!??

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Raghav ji,


> To confirm - the contradiction is the following
> येनैव त्वनुभवेन गम्यते ज्ञानम्, तेनैव ज्ञानाभावस्याप्यवगमान्न कस्यापि
> कुचोद्यस्यात्र संभवोऽस्ति |
> (That anubhava ("intuition" by sAxI) by which jnAnam arises, by that same
> anubhava (sAxi's vedya), jnAna-abhAva is known.
>

When there is jnAna of jnAna-abhAva by sAkshI as claimed by SSS ji, how can
there be jnAna-abhAva? This is the contradiction. To aver jnAna-abhAva when
jnAna (of jnAna-abhAva by sAkshI) is present -- is contradictory.


> but any sAxi-vedya viShaya is not abhAva.
> So we can say
> साक्षिवेद्यत्वात् अभावविलक्षणत्वम् ?
>

Yes. The jnAna of abhAva is always paroksha-jnAna, whereas sAkshI-jnAna is
always aparoksha-jnAna. So, if x is sAkshi-vedya, x is not an abhAva.

Here, let us note the following:

*How to determine if x is sAkshi-vedya?*

If x is not a vishaya of any pramANa and yet x is shining in an aparoksha
manner i.e. we are having aparoksha-jnAna of x, then x is sAkshi-vedya.
BAla BodhinI clarifies "यः प्रमाणान्तराविषयोऽपि साक्षात्स्फुरति, तस्यैव
अनात्मवस्तुनः साक्षिवेद्यत्वमङ्गीक्रियते" [Pl check
https://archive.org/details/xlhS_advaita-siddhi-sanskrit-with-commentary-bala-bodhini-by-yogendra-natha-sharma-ed/page/n489/mode/2up?view=theater
]

Now, abhAva is not aparoksha. It is always a vishaya of paroksha-jnAna.
Hence, abhAva can never be sAkshi-vedya.

"abhAva-jnAna" is sAkshi-vedya because paroksha-jnAna also shines in an
aparoksha manner [abhAva-jnAna-jnAna is an aparoksha-jnAna]. But abhAva is
not sakshi-vedya.


> Why is SSS ji constrained to say jnAna-abhAva is not
> anupalabdhi-pramANa-gamya? Because that requires pratIyogI jnAnam?
>

That is one reason. And another reason - they hold jnAna-abhAva as ajnAna.
And it is stated by BhAshyakAra that pramANa-vyApAra is subsequent to
avidyA and avidyA is not pramANa-gamya. So they cannot accept that
jnAna-abhAva is pramANa-gamya.

But he forgets that abhAva is not a vishaya of aparoksha-jnAna. If he holds
that jnAna-abhAva is ajnAna, then he cannot explain the
aparoksha-perception of ajnAna.

The contradiction of prior jnAna of pratiyogI, as stated earlier, remains.

prAk-abhAva has been rejected in great detail in such a fashion that no one
can object to it.

In this background, to hold ajnAna as jnAna-prAk-abhAva by SSS ji is
untenable.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.