[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: avidyA is adhyasta (superimposed) in AtmA

[Raghav Kumar Dwivedula]

Namaste Jaishankar ji
Thank you for the reply.
Yes,  mAyA is triguNAtmaka.... I meant that the *pratyaya* aspect of the
triguNas represents a pariNama which arises during the course of the
sRShTi-krama. And it is being told as the cause of the three types viz.,
agrahaNa etc.

I understand you to be saying that the idea of malina-sattva upadhi is
intended to be conveyed here with the idea of avidyA being  tAmasa-pratyaya.

Om
Raghav



On Sat, 1 Feb, 2025, 10:26 pm Jaishankar Narayanan, <jai1971 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Raghav ji
>
> It is not proper to say avidyA is sequentially prior to triguNa. avidyA is
> triguNAtmaka and when we talk about avidyA with reference to a jivA as
> upAdhi, the tamas aspect is pradhAna. That is why it is also referred to as
> malinasattva pradhAna in contrast to Ishvara upAdhi which is suddhasattva
> pradhAna.
>
> With love and prayers,
> Jaishankar
>
> On Sat, 1 Feb, 2025, 4:46 pm Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l, <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> Namaste Jaishankar ji
>> That's a very important point and thank you for highlighting that.  The
>> english word 'qualities' for  the  triguNas does not capture the idea that
>> there is no other 'substantive' that these three guNas putatively qualify.
>> The triguNas themselves are dravyas, the pariNAmI upAdana kAraNam; they
>> are
>> the constituents of prakRti.
>>
>> A friend of mine once rejoined highlighting the many contextual meanings
>> of
>> the word guNa, that the word guNa is not always quality , else guNa sandhi
>> in grammar would be "quality" sandhi - a meaningless construct!
>>
>> On the second point -
>> That this tAmAsa pratyaya which is AvaraNAtmaka, is the cause of the
>> avidyAtraya viz., agrahaNa, saMshaya-grahaNa and viparIta-grahaNa is
>> noteworthy.
>>
>> Because it is axiomatic for SSSS that there is no fourth idea/entity/cause
>> of the avidyAtraya.
>>
>> Having said that, since avidyA (including its AvaraNa aspect)  is
>> sequentially prior to the three guNas, and avidyA is not a product/kArya
>> or
>> expression of the three guNas, how are we to assimilate the idea of avidyA
>> being a 'tAmasa' pratyaya.
>>
>> I would understand that although avidyA is the very cause of even
>> antaHkaraNa, the antaHkaraNa by its capacity for tAdAtmya with cit,
>> nevertheless appears to carry or is the Ashraya of that very mUlAvidyA. In
>> that sense, from the POV of mUlAvidyA expression in the antaHkaraNa, we
>> can
>> call avidyA a tAmasa *pratyaya*.
>>
>> I request you to clarify and kindly share your thoughts on this.
>>
>> Om
>> Raghav
>>
>>