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

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Raghav ji.

1. If ajnAna is just antaHkaraNa-doSha the same way as seeing a snake
> instead of a rope is an  antaHkaraNa doSha, then it does not square with
> SSSS saying that आत्मनः एव अज्ञानित्वम्  particularly noteworthy is the एव
> usage by SSSS.
>

That is true.

I have a bit to add here. avidyA is not the antah-karaNa-dOsha even in case
of rajju-sarpa.

DOsha is required in kArya-adhyAsa. This dOsha is three-fold.
PramAtri-dOsha, vishaya-dOsha and karaNa-dOsha. PramAtri-dOsha are fear,
attachment; vishaya-dosha is similarity; karaNa-dOsha is defect in the eye
etc.

avidyA as antah-karaNa-dOsha is not required. antah-karaNa acting as upAdhi
acts as dOsha regarding fear, attachment etc.

Illusory snake is a product of avidyA, which is
rajju-avachchhina-chaitanya-nishTha. We cannot say that avidyA is
antah-karaNa-dOsha even in rajju-sarpa. That is my point.


2. Regarding the dRshyatvAt hetu mentioned by you for the mithyAtvaM
> niscaya, how do they or anyone deal with dRshyatvAt hetu which would put
> the rope-snake and antaHkaraNa as being ontologically same. And this
> ontological sameness is taught and asserted while within vyavahAra itself
> during the vedAnta teaching process.
>
> Because they (SSSS and co.) seek to arbitrarily contradict the dRshyatvAt
> hetu by saying snake is avidyA-kalpita while mind itself is not
> avidyA-kalpita, it is mAya-kalpita. My understanding is that this is
> contrary to Siddhanta because it leaves mAyA unsublated.
>

SSSS ji holds mAyA to be avidyA-kalpita. That is, mAyA is imagined due to
ignorance. And this imagined-mAyA is shakti of Ishwara. And with this
shakti, real Ishwara creates real world, which is not different from
Brahman.

You can ascertain the logical soundness of this assertion!!

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar

>