[Advaita-l] A Post-Shankara Advaitin says 'anādi ajnāna, etc. are mithyā'

[V Subrahmanian]

Sri Achyutakrishnānanda Tirtha (17th–18th Century CE), who admits
mūlāvidyā, also wrote a commentary on Sri Appayya Dikshita's Siddhantaleśa
Saṅgraha.  In his commentary, Vanamālā, on the Taittiriya Upanishad
Bhashya, he says:

एतेनानाद्यज्ञानादेरपि मिथ्यात्वं व्याख्यातम् , अज्ञानादेरपि चैतन्ये
कादाचित्कत्वात् । न च हेत्वसिद्धिः, अज्ञानतत्सम्बन्धजीवत्वादीनां विद्यया
निवृत्तिश्रवणादित्यन्यत्र विस्तरः ।

"By this, the *mithyātva *(illusoriness) of *beginningless ignorance
(anādi-ajñāna)* and the like has also been explained, since ignorance and
the like are only occasional (kādācitka) in Consciousness (Chaitanya).

Nor is the reason (hetu) unestablished (asiddha), because the scriptures
declare that ignorance, its connection (with the Self), jīva-hood, and the
like are removed by knowledge (vidyā). A more detailed discussion of this
is given elsewhere."

Recently we saw another Post Shankara Advaitin also hold that avidya, etc.
are mithya.

Swami Vidyaranya, in his Anubhuti Prakasha has said:

अविद्यादिनिवृत्तिश्च चैतन्यव्यतिरेकतः ।

नास्तीत्येवमभिप्राय एवकारेण सूच्यते ॥ १८.२६९॥

The cessation of anādi Avidya, etc. is also not distinct from Brahman.

Here too the appearance/superimposition of Avidya, etc., on Brahman is
admitted to be non-different from Brahman. This implies that Avidya, etc.
are only appearances in Brahman.

All the above prove unequivocally that proponents of the concept of Mūlāvidyā
do not consider it a real entity apart from Brahman. In other words,
admitting Mulavidya does not render Brahman un-Advaitic, meaning it doesn't
introduce a second entity.

Warm regards

subbu