[Advaita-l] Chakilam Venkatesh - Controversy???

[Vikram Jagannathan]

Namaskaram Raghav ji,


Indeed
>
> 1. SB *-* māyā = NB ✅ as per advaita
> (Negation of the upādhis lands us on NB)
>
> But once NB is arrived at by apavāda,
>
> 2. NB *+* māyā = SB ❌ absurd
> (NB being non-dual cannot be part of any *transaction* like addition or
> even superimposition because there is no other entity other than NB. All
> talk of superimposition is at the earlier stage alone.)
>
> Kindly feel free to alter if I did not capture your intended meaning.
>


Indeed so. Minor clarification - the two representative equations under
discussion are *NB + maya = SB* and *SB = maya + NB*. When it comes to deep
dialectics, the former is incoherent; the latter is methodologically sound.
This distinction is foundational for the correct understanding of Advaita
Siddhanta (AS). *For general conversation / understanding, the distinction
can be overlooked and they can be considered as synonymous.*

Before going into the details, a quick callout - as you have mentioned SB -
maya = NB is valid from AS perspective, as it does mean that negating the
maya upadhi from SB lands on NB. However, from a sadhana perspective this
is inaccurate as it is futile attempting to negate maya from SB (an entity
perceived as distinct from us) prior to us overcoming our own ignorance.

*Detailed clarification:*
NB + maya = SB (equivalently, NB + avidya = “me/I”) assumes that there is
some distinct entity NB that somehow associates with a mysterious
maya/avidya and thereby “becomes” a distinct SB. On that framing, AS is
depicted as removing/transcending maya, so thatwhat is now perceived by me
as SB will then be perceived as NB and somehow I will be merged with NB.
Effectively, I will be destroyed and all that would remain is the NB entity
alone. Unsurprisingly, a system cast this way invites serious objections;
Swami Ramanujacharya, Swami Vedanta Desikan and Swami Vyasatirtha have
pioneered in a deep threadbare analysis of such a system and identified its
various flaws / inconsistencies.

Advaita’s actual starting point is SB = maya + NB (equivalently, “me/I” =
avidya + NB). What is now taken as SB is an adhyasa - a superimposition -
of maya/avidya upon NB. The fact that adhyasa is in operation in my
day-to-day experience is an undeniable fact. I, due to my current
ignorance, superimpose maya on NB to perceive as SB. Classical Advaita
describes SB as “maya-avachinna chaitanya”. This is pedagogically sound
because teaching begins from the vyavaharika (everyday / current
experience) standpoint, within which maya/avidya operates, and then unfolds
the Paramarthika (ultimate) Truth - Reality. Understanding the concept of
adhyasa is of paramount importance, and hence Swami Shankaracharya starts
the Brahma-sutra-Bhashya with the Adhyasa-bhashya.

*General comments on the importance & relevance of this distinction:*
The persistent underestimation of adhyasa, by non-Advaitins, explains why
some question the relevance of the Adhyasa-bhashya or bypass it while
claiming to teach an “Advaita view” of the Gita or Upanishads. Some of
them, in an attempt to display a reconciliatory tone, patronize
adhyasa-bhashya being addressed towards Buddhists and other non-Vaidikas.
More on this here -
https://archive.org/details/adhyasa-bhashya-reflections-on-scope-and-relevance

Many non-Advaitin presentations of the Advaita purvapaksha start from the
perspective of NB and treat SB as really distinct from NB. From there arise
questions such as “Where is maya in NB?”, “How can NB be associated with
maya?”, and “How can such an association be overcome?” These questions are
genuinely valid only if one first posits a real association in NB itself.
Advaita does not. The association exists solely from the standpoint of
maya/avidya - within the vyavaharika perspective. When maya/avidya is
sublated, that projected association collapses with it. Hence Swami
Sankaracharya, for every question on the locus of avidya/maya, almost
always points the question back to the questioner.

Without this foundational clarity, Advaita can appear inconsistent or
“intellectually unsound”. The issue, however, lies in the initial
misframing, not in Advaita Siddhanta.

The famous saptavidha-anupapatti has force only if one begins with NB +
maya = SB. From the proper pedagogical starting point - SB = maya + NB -
those objections can be clarified and rendered invalid in its entirety.
Now, this statement does not trivialize the depth of the critique or the
care needed in response; it simply identifies the core of the clarification.

In sum: Start with NB + maya = SB, and the criticisms seem apt. Start where
Advaita actually begins - SB = maya + NB - and they lose their footing.

A final, respectful note: Advaita Siddhanta equips one to overcome one's
own ignorance, if and when they are earnest to overcome their ignorance.
For many, who are quite content with their ignorance, AS is perhaps not yet
the right sadhana for them. Preparatory disciplines such as chitta-shuddhi
(mental-purification) and chitta-ekagrata (focused steadiness of mind) are
appropriate steps (through karma, bhakthi and raja yoga) before engaging
fully with AS.

prostrations,
Vikram