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

[Jaishankar Narayanan]

Namaste,

I was reading the Br. Up Bhashya today. With reference to Brahman being the
vishayA and AshrayA of ajAnana one more reference

तस्मात् परब्रह्मव्यतिरेकेण संसारी नाम न अन्यत् वस्त्वन्तरमस्ति ।
तस्मात्सुष्ठूच्यते ‘ब्रह्म वा इदमग्र आसीत् तदात्मानमेवावेत् अहं
ब्रह्मास्मीति’ (बृ. उ. १ । ४ । १०) —’ नान्यदतोऽस्ति द्रष्टृ नान्यदतोऽस्ति
श्रोतृ’ इत्यादिश्रुतिशतेभ्यः । तस्मात् परस्यैव ब्रह्मणः सत्यस्य सत्यं नाम
उपनिषत् परा ॥ इति  बृहदारण्यकोपनिषद्भाष्यम् द्वितीयाध्यायस्य प्रथमं
ब्राह्मणम् ॥

tasmāt parabrahmavyatirekeṇa saṃsārī nāma na anyat vastvantaramasti ।
tasmātsuṣṭhūcyate ‘brahma vā idamagra āsīt tadātmānamevāvet ahaṃ
brahmāsmīti' (bṛ. u. 1 । 4 । 10) —' nānyadato'sti draṣṭṛ nānyadato'sti
śrotṛ' ityādiśrutiśatebhyaḥ । tasmāt parasyaiva brahmaṇaḥ satyasya satyaṃ
nāma upaniṣat parā ॥ iti bṛhadāraṇyakopaniṣadbhāṣyam dvitīyādhyāyasya
prathamaṃ brāhmaṇam ॥

with love and prayers,
Jaishankar


On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 4:50 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Bhaskar prabhu ji
>
> > When it is said Atma is having the avidyA, we have to understand that
> > jeevaatma is being talked here and jeeva as Chaitanya / knower/kshetrajna
> > cannot have this avidyA in himself as he is seeing it as Vishaya through
> > his antaHkaraNa hence avidyA is the dOsha of karaNa and not pertains to
> > jnAtru.
> >
>
> Ok. So, when it is said that AtmA is the Ashraya of avidyA, then AtmA here
> means jIva. Right?
>
> And when in the same breath, it is said that AtmA is vishaya of avidyA
> alao, then again AtmA means jIva? That is, jIva is the vishaya of avidyA??
>
> Naishkarmya Siddhi says- in cahpter 3 - एतेभ्य एव हेतुभ्यो
> नानात्मविषयमज्ञानं संभवतीति ग्राह्यम्। ।* एवं तावन्नानात्मनोऽज्ञानित्वं
> नापि तद्विषयमज्ञानम्* । *पारिशेष्यादात्मन एवास्त्वज्ञानं*
> तस्याज्ञोऽस्मीत्यनुभवदर्शनात् । "सोऽहं भगवो
> मन्त्रविदेवास्मि नात्मवित् "इति श्रुतेः । न चात्मनोऽज्ञानस्वरूपता तस्य
> चैतन्यमात्रस्वाभाव्यादतिशयश्च संभवति ज्ञानविपरिलोपो ज्ञानप्राप्तेश्च
> संभवस्तस्य ज्ञानकारित्वात् । न च अज्ञानकार्यत्वं
> कूटस्थात्मस्वाभाव्यादज्ञानानपेक्षस्य चात्मनः स्वत एव
> स्वरूपसिद्धेर्युक्तमात्मन एवाज्ञत्वम् । *किंविषयं पुनस्तदात्मनोऽज्ञानम् ।
> आत्मविषयमिति ब्रूमः* ।
>
> Basically, NS says that there are two entities, AtmA and anAtmA. He gives
> logic that anAtmA is ajnAna-prasUta and hence anAtmA cannot be
> ajnAna-Ashraya. And then he says - for this (and some more) reason, anAtmA
> cannot be vishaya of ajnAna either. So, he says that AtmA is both Ashraya
> and vishaya of ajnAna.
>
> You postulate that AtmA here means jIva. So, you would hold that jIva,
> being AtmA, is the vishaya of ajnAna as well??
>
> Regards.
> Sudhanshu Shekhar.
>
>