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

[Raghav Kumar Dwivedula]

On Sat, 14 Sept, 2024, 11:58 am Venkatraghavan S, <agnimile at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Sudhanshu Ji,
> The position that Sri SSS adopts is essentially the position of the mAdhva
> / naiyyAyika.
>
> Firstly the naiyyAyika.
> Sri SSS also seems to be arguing like a naiyyAyika - he says न हि ज्ञानं
> प्रमाणगम्यम् , येन तदभावोऽपि प्रमाणगम्यः स्यादिति शङ्क्येत | येनैव
> त्वनुभवेन गम्यते ज्ञानं, तेनैव ज्ञानाभावस्याप्यनुभवान्न कस्यापि
> कुचोद्यस्यात्र संभवोऽस्ति |
>
> It is the naiyyAyika who holds that as a rule, the pramANa which is the
> means for the knowledge of the pratiyogi, must also be the pramANa for the
> knowledge of its abhAva too. There is no reason therefore, to hold that if
> jnAna is sAkshi-vedya, its abhAva also must be sAkshi-vedya only.
>
> For the naiyyAyika, there is no separate pramANa called anupalabdhi
> itself, whereas for us, abhAva is only known through anupalabdhi. If one
> took Sri SSS' postulate to its logical conclusion, all instances of abhAva
> can similarly be cognised through the pramANa that is necessary to cognise
> the pratiyogi.
>
> For example, consider the anumAna -  प्रतियोग्यभावः  न अनुपलधिगम्यः,
> अभावत्वात्, ज्ञानाभाववत् . If jnAna abhAva was sAkshi vedya, then it is not
> anupalabdhi-gamyah (not known via anupalabdhi), and hence every abhAva can
> be known by some other pramANa itself, leaving no scope for anupalabdhi
> pramANa's application.
>
> Therefore, Sri SSS' position essentially is a rejection of anupalabdhi
> pramANa in toto.
>
> Next, here is how Sri SSS argues like a mAdhva. In the advaita siddhi
> chapter on ajnAna being the object of perception, the nyAyAmRtakAra, a
> mAdhva, argues the very same thing - that jnAna abhAva can be known by the
> sAkshi itself - which the siddhikAra completely refutes.
>
> ननु- तदा ज्ञानाभावोऽपि स्वरूपेणैव भासताम्। सप्रतियोगिकत्वेनाभावज्ञान एव
> प्रतियोगिज्ञानस्य हेतुत्वाद्। अन्यथा `प्रमेयम्' इति ज्ञानेऽप्यभावो न
> भासेतेतिचेन्न।
> The nyAyAmRtakAra asks - Let the svarUpa of the absence of cognition also
> be known by the sAkshi itself. The requirement that the cognition of
> absence needs the cognition of its counterpositive, only applies where the
> cognition of absence is revealed *as* the cognition of the absence having
> a particular X as a counterpositive. If this is not admitted, the cognition
> "everything is knowable" would not reveal absence.
>
> To explain. prameyatva (knowability) is said to be kevalAnvayi
> (universally true) by the naiyyAyika. That is - everything is knowable. For
> this to be universally true, abhAva also has to be knowable. However, if it
> is argued that every instance of abhAva jnAna requires pratiyogi jnAna,
> then absence would not be part of the "everything" in the cognition
> "everything is knowable", ie abhAva would not have prameyatva, if some
> relaxation of the "abhAva jnAna requiring pratiyogi jnAna" rule is not
> admitted.
>
> The siddhikAra rejects this. He says.
>
> साक्षिणा तावन्न स्वरूपेणाभावावगाहनम्, तस्य साक्षात्साक्ष्यवेद्यत्वात्।
> The sAkshi cannot reveal the svarUpa of absence like that, because that
> (absence) is not capable of being directly revealed by the sAkshi.
>
> What he is saying is that the sAkshi can only reveal that to which it has
> a connection (svasambaddham prakAshayati). That sambandha needs a yogyatA -
> the object should be capable of reflecting the sAkshi in it. The mind,
> thoughts etc, being sattva-guNa pradhAna, are able to reflect the sAkshi
> (they become sAkshi abhivyanjaka). The abhivyakti of sAkshi by absence is
> not possible. Absence can be cognisable by the sAkshi only if a vritti
> objectifying absence appears in front of it, because it is only the abhAva
> jnAna vritti that is capable of reflecting the sAkshi. Without a vritti,
> abhAva cannot be directly perceived by sAkshi.
>
> If this is not admitted (ie that the sAkshi can only see the vRtti, it can
> see abhAva itself), then the entirety of pratikarma-vyavasthA can be set
> aside.
>

Namaste Venkat ji
Thank you for the lucid post. You wrote - "If this is not admitted (ie that
the sAkshi can only see the vRtti, it *can* see abhAva itself").

It should be *cannot*, right?

Om
Raghav





How can one explain that the sAkshi that is "here", can view an object out
> there, without the vRtti bringing the object into contact with the sAkshi?
>
> It also leads to sarvajnatva Apatti. That is, if abhAva can be viewed by
> the sAkshi, then what is to stop every object in the entire universe being
> viewed by the sAkshi without the intervention of a vRtti.
>
> Thus this argument of Sri SSS that the sAkshi itself can see abhAva leads
> to several flaws, namely: 1) the rejection of anupalabdhi pramANa in its
> entirety 2) pratikarma-vyavasthA being totally dismantled 3) and the
> ridiculousness of sarvajnatva for all!
>
> Kind regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>
> On Thu, 12 Sept 2024, 19:30 Sudhanshu Shekhar, <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Namaste,
>>
>> I rechecked SugamA and my memory served me right. It is indeed stated
>> there by SSS ji that jnAna-abhAva, termed by him as ajnAna, is prAk-abhAva.
>>
>> *तर्हि कतमोऽयं ज्ञानाभाव इति चेत् । प्रागभाव एवास्तु । *
>>
>> The web-link is
>> https://adhyatmaprakasha.org/php/bookreader/templates/book.php?type=sanskrit&book_id=008&pagenum=0001#page/45/mode/1up
>>
>> Now, it is submitted that the concept of prAk-abhAva has been shredded to
>> pieces in advaita sampradAya. Details can be seen in
>> pratyaksha-pramANa-vichAra-in-ajnAna. Those who hold jnAna-abhAva as
>> jnAna-prAk-abhAva should answer these challenges or else accept that there
>> is nothing like prAk-abhAva.
>>
>> None of these well-settled principles, whereby prAk-abhAva has been
>> rejected, have been mentioned by SSS ji in his SugamA.
>>
>> Further, he postulates jnAna of this jnAna-prAk-abhAva through anubhava
>> (sAkshI). He accepts that anupalabdhi cannot work here.  ननु नायं
>> ज्ञानाभावः, अभावप्रमाणेनानवगमादित्युक्तम् । *सत्यमुक्तम्, दुरुक्तं तु
>> तत्* । *न हि ज्ञानं प्रमाणगम्यम् । येन तदभावोऽपि प्रमाणगम्यः स्यादिति*
>> शङ्कयेत । *येनैव त्वनुभवेन गम्यते ज्ञानम्, तेनैव ज्ञानाभावस्याप्यवगमान्न
>> कस्यापि कुचोद्यस्यात्र संभवोऽस्ति । *
>>
>> So, his logic is - only if x is known by pramANa, x-abhAva is required to
>> be known by pramANa. Since jnAna is not known by pramANa, but by anubhava
>> (sAkshI), jnAna-abhAva is not known by pramANa either. It is known by same
>> anubhava (sAkshI) by which jnAna is known.
>>
>> Now!! jnAna is known by sAkshI. jnAna-abhAva is being known by sAkshI as
>> per SSS ji. So, there is jnAna-abhAva-jnAna present as per SSS ji. And yet,
>> there is jnAna-abhAva as per him!! Self-contradiction!! 😀
>>
>> Further, Swamiji did not realize that by making jnAna-abhAva a
>> sAksi-vedya-vastu, he is positing its bhAvatva. Those who hold jnAna-abhAva
>> as abhAva can never accept its upalabdhi. It has to be anupalabdha.
>>
>> यद्यपि ज्ञानं साक्षिवेद्यम्, तद्द्वारा तदवच्छेदको विषयश्च साक्षिवेद्यः; *तथापि
>> ज्ञानाभावो न साक्षिवेद्यः, तस्यानुपलब्धत्वात्* ।
>>
>> If some discussion follows wherein someone seeks to argue as to how
>> jnAna-abhAva is prAk-abhAva and is sAkshi-vedya, I will delve into it
>> further. As of now, it is enough to demonstrate that SSS ji's idea of
>> jnAna-abhAva as prAk-abhAva and anubhava-vedya is illogical and
>> self-contradictory.
>>
>> Regards.
>> Sudhanshu Shekhar.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "advaitin" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAH9%3D%2BBCc_b1ZorDfbO73YmjRBqUmOx0BdzXrcECbovAxR1w9rA%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAH9%3D%2BBCc_b1ZorDfbO73YmjRBqUmOx0BdzXrcECbovAxR1w9rA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>