[Advaita-l] [advaitin] request for PTB support for DSV and EJV

[Michael Chandra Cohen]

Namaste Subbuji,
Yes, I remember you citing Gita 2.16. Apologies if I did not respond in
kind to the initial comment. Here I have invoked Chatgpt in response. It
may seem unfair but its analysis is far more thorough and comprehensive
than my own at this time. Excluding AI from these conversations seems
unwise and perhaps prejudicial, especially given the depth of its analysis.
Error correction is certainly necessary and I welcome your critique of its
output.

Below is a *clean, forum-ready response* that stays tightly focused on the
methodological issue and directly addresses Subbu’s move from
*non-objectivity* to *subjectivity*, while keeping the BhG 2.16 Bhāṣya
squarely within PTB logic—not DSV/EJV.
------------------------------

Subbu, the move from *non-objectivity* to *subjectivity* is precisely where
the difficulty enters, and it is not licensed by either *Gauḍapāda* or
*Śaṅkara*—including in *BhG 2.16 Bhāṣya*.

What Śaṅkara is doing in 2.16 is *not* relocating the world from an
objective pole to a subjective pole; he is *withdrawing ontological
commitment altogether*. “That which does not exist, appears to exist” (*asato
bhāvaḥ*) is a statement of *ontological falsity (mithyātva)*, not a theory
of perceptual production or subject-dependent construction.

Several clarifications are crucial:

   1.

   *Non-objectivity ≠ subjectivity*
   Subjectivity still presupposes a *subject–object polarity* in which the
   object is now said to exist *in* or *for* the subject. That is exactly
   the structure presupposed by DSV/EJV. Śaṅkara does not take this step.
   His claim is more radical: the appearance does *not qualify as an object
   at all*, whether external or internal. To call it “subjective” is
   already to grant it a determinate epistemic status that Śaṅkara is negating.
   2.

   *BhG 2.16 marks a shift in evaluation, not in causal theory*
   You are right that Śaṅkara moves from *anityatva* (impermanence) to
   *asattva* (non-existence). But this is a *pedagogical deepening of
   negation*, not a new explanatory account of how the world is produced or
   by whom.
   The verse teaches the *jñānī’s vision*: appearances are endured not
   because they are fleeting realities, but because they *never possessed
   reality to begin with*. Nothing here implies that perception *creates*
   the world.
   3.

   *No perceptual production is introduced*
   Nowhere in the Bhāṣya does Śaṅkara say—or need to say—that the world
   arises because it is perceived. He says it is *mistakenly taken to exist*.
   The error lies in *superimposition (adhyāsa)*, not in cognition acting
   as a productive force.
   DSV/EJV requires exactly this extra step: that perception or cognition
   be granted *explanatory primacy* in the arising of the world. That step
   is absent here.
   4.

   *Gauḍapāda’s vaitathya supports the same point*
   When Gauḍapāda establishes *vaitathya* (falsity), he undermines
   objectivity, not by re-grounding the world in the subject, but by showing
   that *neither pole survives ultimate scrutiny*. The waking world is
   likened to dream not because it is “mind-produced,” but because it *fails
   ontological tests of reality*.

In short, *non-objectivity* in Śaṅkara and Gauḍapāda means *ontological
indeterminacy and falsity*, not *subjective existence*. To equate the two
is to quietly import a post-Śaṅkara explanatory framework—precisely the
move DSV/EJV depends on, and precisely what neither the *Kārikās* nor the
PTB texts require or support.

This is why BhG 2.16, far from grounding DSV/EJV, actually reinforces the
PTB position: *negation as pedagogical terminus*, not perception as
ontological engine.

On Wed, Jan 14, 2026 at 8:22 AM Ananta Chaitanya [Sarasvati] via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Sudhanshuji,
>
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2026 at 4:07 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > References to DSV in PrasthAna-trayI-bhAshya as held in sampradAya:
> >
> > 1. *ChhAndOgya 8.5.4* - अत्यल्पमिदमुच्यते । जाग्रद्विषया अपि
> > मानसप्रत्ययाभिनिर्वृत्ता एव,
> > सदीक्षाभिनिर्वृत्ततेजोबन्नमयत्वाज्जाग्रद्विषयाणाम्.
> >
> > ...
>
> Thanks for these and the earlier excellent quotes from a wide range of
> texts establishing DSV, although clear in Shruti, perhaps hidden in
> bhAShya. They can be useful for some sAdhakas, if not all. Those who can't
> even agree to such a sambhAvana are being plain adamant, showcasing the
> adage: if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
>
> gurupAdukAbhyAm,
> --Ananta Chaitanya
> /* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
> That, owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>