Avidya - jnanAbhAva?

[Guest guest]

Namaste Jaishankar-ji,Glad to see you returning to first principles in your examination of the

basic concepts and asking searching questions where there has been a

tendency to echo cliches. Adhyasa, it seems to me, has always suffered

from the taint of the confusion analogy that was only meant to give an

illustration of how the object could travel, as it were, into the mind of

the subject. Some have taken adhyasa as ontological error without really

considering that after jnana perception goes on. As you say "without

adhyasa there is no perception (no division of perceiver and perceived) and

no possibility of jivanmukti."

Best Wishes,Michael

[Guest guest]

Sri Sadaji, ProfVKji and Nairji, thanks for your replies.

 

Just to clarify, I had not looked into the argument of Nairji or

Bhaskarji, or Sw. Krishnananda (till today). I just entered the

discussion midway with my own issues to resolve.

 

And they were more or less practical: how to get there. I don't mind

Sadaji's or Nairji's positions, but I want to be free from the

delusions and vasanas, however it really means. One of my problems (?)

is I cannot go far into Bhakthi-mode to Ishvara without getting a

feeling of self-fooling and retreating therefore. But since Sadaji and

ProfVKji (and Shastriji) have suggested it again, I will look into it

again in a more proper and less self-fooling manner. Not only from

you, but practically every revered sage I know of gives/agrees to this

advice.

 

Ideally, Nairji, I love the position of Swami Krishnananda. It is the

ideal position, whether correct or not. I recall a story of Sadasiva

Brahmendra going along naked and some Muslim dude cutting off his

hand, and the sage kept walking along, there was no break in his

Brahman-consciousness. Yes, ideal. Even Ramana or Sri Ramakrishna

during intense days of 'samadhi' were oblivious to the world; someone

external had to force food into them, etc. In fact, I recall some

verses in Vivekachudamani where the student after realization

describes his state; please read from verse 480 on in

 

http://www.geocities.com/advaitavedant/vivekachudamani.htm

 

Perhaps this supports your case.

 

Now do I believe the Mukta is always in that state: not completely

(but that may be due to ajnana). They do act and respond and their

mind (define as you will) seems aware of distinctions but I accept

with full awareness of maya or Ishvara : as my first post in this

series, Sri Ramakrishna distinguishes the two states, and in the

second he is the child ever aware of His Mother and corresponding with

Her. It is a bhava-state that allows no real delusion. I think the

Gopis are also described in such manners. Sri Ramana's mind also

adopts a bhava -- but there, we may call it jnana-bhava. As an ajnani,

otherwise I am thrown into confusion; so allow me this compromise for

now:) The BMI that we call 'Sadasiva' that was unperturbed to the

sword also composed metrical songs if I am not correct. (Perhaps our

mistake is in identifying atma in the BMI, and then arguing whether

the atma can undergo transactions.)

 

Anyway, Nairji, your post did not address how to get to the

jivan-mukta state. Does Sw. Krishnananda address the issue directly? I

am definitely lazy in going into weblinks but will do so if you give

for this question.

 

Thanks again to Sadaji and ProfVKji; I will take your advices

seriously. I am going into a bit of silence due to time-constraints;

will hopefully use our transactions properly.

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda

<kuntimaddisada wrote:

>

> Jiivan mukta knows the world is mithyaa and the substantive of this

world is nothing but Brahman, the consciousness-infinite-existence

that he is and the world is.

>

> ajnaani may know from the scriptures that this is mithyaa - but he

still considers as real since that understanding has not sinked in.

All his transactions therefore reflect that the world is real and his

transactions are real and therefore he goes through all the agonies of

that the real world provides-the dualities. He wants to realize - what

that he is existent-consciousness and not the mithyaa world including

this BMI.

>

> Jiiva mukta recognizes this world is Maya or illusory including his

BMI and the world becomes a vibuuti of the Lord or his own glory. He

enjoys much more the happenings in the world without psychologically

getting affected by the things happening in this world. He will use

the BMI to the best he can.

>

> ajnaani, since he takes the world is real - the samsaara is still

real - that it is mityaa has not sinked in deep enough that mind has

full grasp of its implications.

>

> Now coming to your problem: I understand your problem. Here is my

advice. Please keep shifting your attention slowly and steadily on to

that witnessing consciousness that you are by slowly detaching

yourself from the happenings, at psychological level. It is

difficult but as Krishna says by abhyaasa one slowly establishes in

that knowledge. Krishna emphasizes this as thinking of me act on †"

ultimately without any other thought other than me †" that means you

have to look at the world as Krishna himself †" in all forms and

shapes and act accordingly.

>

> - Thus the best way is to bring in Iswara and see him in all your

transactions or vyavahaara - recognizing slowly that He is sat chit

ananda swaruupa - that you are. Everything that you see is his lella

vibhuuti only.

>

> This can be established by mind constantly dwelling on this - are

shrotavyaH, mantavyaH, nidhidhyaasitavyaH - There is no other short cuts.

>

>

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Ramji.

 

I have not imposed and never will impose my opinion on others. Your

accusation is, therefore, baseless. I would expect a reciprocal

attitude from my detractors, whoever they are. That is all. No problem

if they are passionate about it. Christening dissent a mental block

is not reciprocatory.

 

Best regards.

 

Madathil Nair

______________

 

advaitin , " Ram Chandran " <ramvchandran

wrote:

> .... But it is quite

> unreasonable for you to expect all others to accept " everything what

> you believe. " You seems to imply that just because Krishnanandaji

has

> said so, it must be accepted without any reservations.

[Guest guest]

hare krishna,namaskarams--- On Tue, 2/9/08, Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair wrote:

[Jivanmukti is the highest spiritual experience by the individual when

the mortal body is still hanging on due to the remainder of a little

of Sattvika-ahamkara or Prarabdha. *In this condition the usual

empirical functions of the mind cease, even this remainder of

Prarabdha is not felt, and the mind takes the form of shuddha-sattva,

the original nature of universal knowledge freed from the relations

of space, time and cause.* ---

"The Jivanmukta is in the extreme condition of Jnana, the state of

Self-absorption, non-related and Self-Identical. *There is

practically no difference between the highest Jivanmukti and

Videhamukti, * though in the former state the body is unconsciously

made to linger on for a short time on account of the last failing

momentum of the desires arisen in him before the time of Self-

Experience. For all matters concerning life we need not make any

distinction between the two conditions. *-----

*If the Self is the All, there cannot be non-

Self in Self, and as long as there is perception of the non-Self, it

cannot be the liberated state. Nor can we understand the argument that there can be any duty for the liberated soul."*]i think that answers both sides of the ongoing discussion of the subject under reference. the only way one can know about this is by himself realising as jivanmuktha and realising so he will not be available to answer the various questions raised on the subject to this forum.may lord krishna bless us all to find the answers ourself.baskaran

 

 

 

Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now

[Guest guest]

Dear Putran-ji,

 

Your 41594 refers.

 

Thanks for calling attention to VivekachUdAmaNi verse 480 onwards.

Yes, that tallies with what Sw. Krishnananda says.

 

About your question how to get to the jIvanmukta state, I will

definitely search Swamiji's site for relevant information. In the

meanwhile, these are the thoughts of this non-jIvanmukta expressed on

this forum before in answer to a member's question:

 

1. Since our subject is advaita, first of all acquire an advaitic

model for what you are and what you see around you, which satisfies

both logic and common-sense. Sankara offers this.

 

2. Once you have the model, contemplate on it as much as you can.

Read and listen. Ask questions. Write down your ideas on forums like

this. Talk to other aspirants. Make changes to your model, if

necessary, so that your questions are fully answered and the model is

made shipshape and foolproof.

 

3. As you continue with the contemplation, the scriptural

statements, which you thought you understood well before, will

acquire new meanings. This is the stage they get assimilated into

your life. Till now, they were actually foreign existing in books.

Now they are your own. With that, new insights will begin to dawn on

you spontaneously.

 

4. Do the sAdhana prescribed by your dharma - whatever it is.

Don't tax yourself unnecessarily. When advaita takes root, you will

slowly recognize that you don't have to hurry unnecessarily. Only

the one in fear hurries or runs. An advaitin knows his immortality.

He is neither scared nor hasty.

 

5. Don't try to buy bhakti hoping that it will save. Bhakti can't

be bought. It has to arise spontaneously. Real bhakti is your

imperishable love for yourself. You are both the lover and the

loved. In other words, you are love. When you conclude advaitically

that you are everything and repeat that to yourself, you will begin

to become an ocean of love spontaneously. If you have an

ishtadevata, you will know that you are your own ishtadevata and will

be united in total love with Her/Him. You can thus have an

ishtadevata and remain an advaitin too. That is advaita in apparent

duality of the lover and the loved.

 

6. Living such a life is liberation to my (non-jIvanmuka's)

understading. Make the whole universe your being and heave

as the universe.

 

7. The spontaneity of jivanmukti will then fully blossom. Don't

hurry for it and don't worry with the question when. It is

immaterial.

 

You might also like to read my posts 15110 and 24426 only and only if

you feel that I am not over-demanding.

 

Best regards.

 

Madathil Nair

_____________________

 

 

advaitin , " putranm " <putranm wrote:

 

>> Ideally, Nairji, I love the position of Swami Krishnananda. It is

the

> ideal position, whether correct or not. I recall a story of Sadasiva

> Brahmendra going along naked and some Muslim dude cutting off his

> hand, and the sage kept walking along, there was no break in his

> Brahman-consciousness. Yes, ideal. Even Ramana or Sri Ramakrishna

> during intense days of 'samadhi' were oblivious to the world;

someone

> external had to force food into them, etc. In fact, I recall some

> verses in Vivekachudamani where the student after realization

> describes his state; please read from verse 480 on in

>

> http://www.geocities.com/advaitavedant/vivekachudamani.htm

>

> Perhaps this supports your case.

>.....

> Anyway, Nairji, your post did not address how to get to the

> jivan-mukta state. Does Sw. Krishnananda address the issue

directly? I

> am definitely lazy in going into weblinks but will do so if you give

> for this question.

>

> Thanks again to Sadaji and ProfVKji; I will take your advices

> seriously. I am going into a bit of silence due to time-constraints;

> will hopefully use our transactions properly.

[Guest guest]

In my previous post the sentence

 

> If adhyasa is the cause of samsara, then samsara becomes a product

of samsara.

 

should read as

 

If adhyasa is the cause of samsara, then samsara becomes a product of

adhyasa.

 

 

with love and prayers,

 

Jaishankar

[Guest guest]

praNAms Sri JS prabhuji

Hare Krishna

While replying to Sri MN prabhuji, you had written :

> (b) Has this kincit bhAvamM granted to ajnAna Shankara's nod of

> approval?

 

JS prabhuji :

Yes not only Shankara but even Bhagavan Krishna. As I am travelling

for I can't give you quotations from Sankara Bhasya's right now but

from memory I can remember BG verse 'ajnanena Avrtam jnanam tena

muhyanti jantavah...'(Consciousness is covered by ignorance due to

which the beings are confused..) and 'jnanena tu tad ajnanam yesham

nashitam atmanah tesham Adityavad jnanam prakashayati...(for whom that

ignorance is destroyed by Knowledge the conscoiusness shines forth

like Sun).

bhaskar :

From the above quote you mean to say each & every jIva has his/her own avidyA & whenever a particular jIva gets enlightenment only avidyA (or part there of) pertains to *that* jIva gets destroyed!!...do you accept that avidyA has any parts?? Then what is the meaning in saying avidyA is *kEvala kalpita* & at the same time *kiMchit bhAvaM asti* & also parallelly it is sat-asat vilakshaNa ?? If you are identifying the its (avidyA/ajnAna) part clearly what is the pramANa vachana that you can give for this ?? kindly clarify.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

The Vivaranasampradaya does not accept ekajivavada ( " I

(subject)confronting the rest of the world of objects " model). It is

defeinitely based on nanajivavada or " many subjects " model which again

is the most satisfactory way of explaining things as they appear.

praNAms Sri JS prabhuji

Hare Krishna

It may be a satisfactory/convenient way to get rid of certain problems in siddhAnta nirNaya...But fact remains that there is a scope for both eka jIva & nAna jIva vAda in shankara bhAshya itself...again no need to mention, it entirely depends upon the context of that bhAshya bhAvAnuvAda...Yes, in the one sentence itself of bhAshya there is a mention of both eka jIva as well as nAna jIva-s from different stand-points...For example in sUtra bhAshya 3-2-9, shankara says pure being alone spoken of as a jIva owing to connection with limited adjuncts...This being so we talk of one particular jIva, so long as bondage continues in the form of one upAdhi...But in the case of bondage continuing to attach itself to another upAdhi the topic of another jIva is necessary...as you can see shankara himself contextually accepts both the views...when we take the *samashti* antaHkaraNa (upAdhi-s) for Atman then it is *eka jIva vAda* only...instead of this if we hold the individual antaHkaraNa-s as they are many in vyAvahArika then nAnA jIva vAda can be brought forward...However, there is an express statement from shankara that there can be no *other* chaitanya apart from ekamevAdvitIya Atman that can be called jIva...There may be multiple pots, multiple jars & mugs but space in that is ONE & ONLY ONE. This view is hold good both from vyAvahArik as well as pAramArthik view points...

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

praNAms Sri Sadananda prabhuji

Hare Krishna

Sri S prabhuji :

with all due respects, most of above comments are irrelevant, as I see.

bhaskar :

I am happy to note that my irrelevant comments itself could able to attract around 24 Kbytes size reply from you :-)) But kindly tell me what was the need for bringing *brahman's illumination* when we are discussing the cause of avidyA purely from the doctrinal point of view ??

 

Sri S prabhuji :

That there is ignorance, is a common experience - every child knows and that is why he is sent to school include Swetaketu. Brahman is infinite - pure conscious and is of the nature of existence-consciousness and infiniteness we understand directly from scriptures - with or without Shankara Bhaashya.

bhaskar :

OK agreed prabhuji....but I think you are aware of the vast difference between *vrutti jnAna* of objective knowledge and brahma jnAna or Atma pratyaya......I remembered that you are equating *chemical knowledge* with that of brahman knowledge when we were talking about jnAni's memories of avidyA...Anyway, that is a different issue altogether

Sri S prabhuji :

Everything IS - the existence comes from Brahman only - that includes - avidyaa IS.

bhaskar :

IMO, existence does not come from brahman...but existence IS brahman...sat depicts that...if avidyA IS, then it cannot be removed..coz. *IS*ness denotes akhanda statyatva of brahman...we cannot attribute it to avidyA.

Sri S prabhuji :

since Brahman is without a second, avidya as well as any other knowledge including Vedas as MunDaka classifies as apara vidya - are part of adhyaasa only - since Brahman is one without a second. That includes the material too.

bhaskar :

Sorry prabhuji, I am not able to corelate your statement to our present discussion.

Sri S prabhuji :

Now where is the problem? Since material itself is sat-asat vilakshaNam - since Brahman alone is - every THING including the avidya is of the same nature.

bhaskar :

again, I am lost here...you mean to say here avidyA is also brahman so avidyA is the nature of brahman??

Sri S prabhuji :

avidya has two fold - aavaraNa and viskhepa - that is seen in the subjective adhyaasa as in snake/rope or in the objective adhyaasa as in mirage waters. As long as I have ignorance, like all other 'they' you refer to, I take unreal as real and real as unreal because of ignorance of the reality. This is common sense too for those who think snake is real or mirage water or sunrise and sunset are real. Those who want to know the truth will try to find out - the other live overwhelmed by their ignorance - Hence Krishna statistics - manushyaanaam sahasreshu ..

bhaskar :

Okay prabhuji I can agree with this with some reservation on avidyA's AvaraNa & vikshepa powers..but in what way this is going to justify avidyA is different from adhyAsa??

Sri S prabhuji :

Do I have to study Shankara Bhaasya to understand these - or simple aatmabhoda will do? -

bhaskar :

I am not able to answer this question prabhuji :-)) Its all depends on individual capacity, adhikAra etc. If you ask me, I'd say, if a *simple* AtmabOdha is enough for understanding the complexity of avidyA & its role then shankara would have not taken any trouble to elaborate this concept in nyAya prasthAna...

Sri S prabhuji :

Since you keep asking everyone what Shankara bhaashya said. Shankara said the same things in simple prakaraNa books without breaking my head reading complicated arguments of puurvapaksha and siddhanta - which perhaps is relevant to establish the truth among the various schools of thoughts.

bhaskar :

Again I cannot comment on your conclusions prabhuji..But I definitely dont prefer prakaraNa to prasthAna trayi bhAshya...But I respect your decision & conclusion.

 

Bhakar

 

It is due to lack of knowledge of their true nature they think what they are really not!! is it not?? If this ajnAna is there in an existing form (or bhAva rUpa) then that what is there already cannot be removed by any amount of beatings of jnAna...

 

Sadananda:

 

No - bhaava ruupa also has to be understood as of the nature of sat-asat vilakshaNam. Bhaava ruupa also is of the nature of bhaava only - Any bhaava is notional superimposition on Brahman as bhaava IS. That is it is mithyaa only. sat asat vilakshaNa ruupa is mithyaa ruupa only. Just as maaya - which we call as parameswara shakti, is removed by knowledge. avidya at jiiva level when it gets removed, the jiiva's notions (subjective) gets eliminated like snake is gone when rope is seen. The Iswara sRiShTi remains until the mind that is created by Iswara also goes - that is upaadhiis goes. But there are no mistaken notions (subjective) that the objective plurality is reality - like sunrise and sunset.

bhaskar :

Kindly pardon me prabhuji, from the above explanation & your next post on avidyA, it seems you are not completely aware of the definition of avidyA given by the paNchapAdika- vivaraNa school which sri Jaishankara prabhuji upholding & on which I am debating...So your above explanation is only an additional information for me which is really beneficial but does not have any relevance to the present discussion on *adhyAsa kAraNa*.

Sri S prabhuji:

Bhaskar - Please study the perceptual process post 21 that discusses these.

bhaskar :

Thanks for the pointer prabhuji...Unfortunately I am not following this series...But I have all your posts in my hard disk mail archieves..I'd study it some day.

Hari Om!

Sadananda

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Bhaskarji,

 

Namaskarams

 

> JS prabhuji :

>

>

> Yes not only Shankara but even Bhagavan Krishna. As I am travelling

> for I can't give you quotations from Sankara Bhasya's right now but

> from memory I can remember BG verse 'ajnanena Avrtam jnanam tena

> muhyanti jantavah...'(Consciousness is covered by ignorance due to

> which the beings are confused..) and 'jnanena tu tad ajnanam yesham

> nashitam atmanah tesham Adityavad jnanam prakashayati...(for whom

that

> ignorance is destroyed by Knowledge the conscoiusness shines forth

> like Sun).

>

>

> bhaskar :

>

>

> From the above quote you mean to say each & every jIva has his/her

own

> avidyA & whenever a particular jIva gets enlightenment only avidyA

(or part

> there of) pertains to *that* jIva gets destroyed!!...do you accept

that

> avidyA has any parts?? Then what is the meaning in saying avidyA is

> *kEvala kalpita* & at the same time *kiMchit bhAvaM asti* & also

> parallelly it is sat-asat vilakshaNa ?? If you are identifying the

its

> (avidyA/ajnAna) part clearly what is the pramANa vachana that you

can give

> for this ?? kindly clarify.

 

 

What is your explanation for ajnAnena-Avrtam-jnAnam? Can jnanAbhava

cover anything? Without answering that you are asking some irrelevant

questions. Anyway I will answer. There is no part in avidya. Let me

tell you a story. All your questions will be answered if you

understand the story correctly. Hope you will understand.

 

There was a man who owned many cows. Everyday the cows will be taken

for grazing and then in the evening they will be tied to a post in a

shed. One day some thieves stole the ropes from the cows and our

cowherd had no more ropes. He then thought of a brilliant idea. He

brought home all the cows and went through the motions of tying them

(as though) without the ropes. The cows also thought that they were

bound and went to sleep. The next morning our cowherd came and went

through the motions of untying the 'as though rope' and taking them

for grazing. This routine went on for some days. Now all the cows

had ajnana (ignorance of their real state) and imagined that they

were bound at night. Is there any vikalpa (difference) in the ajnana?

No, as there is no difference between one cow's ajnana and another

cow's ajnana. All the so called ajnanas are only kalpita (imagined).

The ajnana is kalpita but it leads to bondage. One day one of the

cows came to know that it was not bound and it walked away. That

doesn't mean that one part of ajnana is destroyed, as it is only

kalpita. Does it mean that all other cows also will also have this

jnana? No. So they continue to be ajnanis with their kalpita ajnana.

 

with love and prayers,

 

Jaishankar

[Guest guest]

Nairji,

 

Namaskarams.

 

>

> [Kindly refer to Stig-ji's 37774 and 37828 with which I am in full

> agreement.]

>

I read both those messages and it seems that you and Stig-ji do agree

that there 'IS' tatvAgrahana in Deep Sleep as Bija and it is the

cause of Adhyasa when you wake up. You even accept that it can be

called as MulAvidya in post 37828 to which Stig-ji also doesn't seem

to object. So why have you suddenly changed track? I would like to

like to clarify one thing here. None of the post-Sankara Advaitins

claim that MulAvidya is Bhavarupa in the sense that it is a parallel

reality to Brahman. MulAvidya also is kalpita and Mithya.

>

> [i will try to read that Brih. Up. reference. It is not available

to

> me immediately.]

>

> [About others interpreting Advaita in a piecemeal manner and having

> an enlightened Guru, I am afraid, your subjectivism scares me.]

 

It is not my subjectivism. Sruti itself says 'To know that (Brahman)

approach a Guru who is Srotiya(One who has studied scriptures

traditionally) and Brahmanista (steadfast in brahman), with Samit

(sticks) in your hands ( i.e. ready to do seva to that Guru).'

>

> [The only two persons who can claim to have learnt advaita under a

> traditional guru are Sastriji and Bhaskarji, as per their own

> statements in the List. There may be many others. I have no stated

> proof. They all can make this claim. May I suppose that your

views

> would converge with theirs?]

 

I don't know about Sastriji but from whatever I have read from

Bhaskarji it will definitely not converge unless Bhaskarji changes

his views. Of course I can agree to disagree.

 

> [ " The Knowable itself is referred to as jnanagamyaM, when after

being

> known, It becomes the result of Knowledge. " That is from

Shankara's

> commentary. Look at the capitalization of the " I " of it.

jnAnenaiva

> gamyam = jnAnagamyam. It is not manasA-vAcA gamyam. The Self has

to

> be beheld through itself. Not through a mind or intellect which

just

> shines after the Self. Self-knowledge is not the result of the

> ind's/intellect's efforts. Knowledge is the result of Knowledge.

> Knowledge 'gives' Knowledge, 'knows' Knowledge. Self only knows

the

> Self.]

 

Your interpretation is not correct.

 

You have to interpret a sentence based on what has been said before

and what is to be said after. Here jnAnagamyam means jnAyate anena

iti jnAnah tena gamyam (i.e. That by which you know is knowledge and

it is gained by that). Sankara in his Bhasya says jnana here is

amAnitvAdi - amAnitvam (Absence of conceit) etc. Krishna in this

Chapter from verse 13.7 onwards talks about amAnitvAdi Gunas that a

sadhaka should cultivate. In verse 13.11 Krishna himself says these

amAnitvAdi Gunas are called jnAnam (etad jnAnam iti proktam). Only a

person whose mind/intellect is purified by these Gunas can gain this

knowledge. That is the meaning of this verse. Please read Swami

Dayanandaji's book 'Value of Values' for clarification.

 

with love and prayers,

 

Jaishankar

[Guest guest]

praNAms Sri Jai Shankar prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

JS prabhuji :

What is your explanation for ajnAnena-Avrtam-jnAnam? Can jnanAbhava cover anything? Without answering that you are asking some irrelevant

questions. Anyway I will answer. There is no part in avidya. Let me tell you a story. All your questions will be answered if you understand the story correctly. Hope you will understand.

bhaskar :

you tell me what we should understand from the statement ajnAnena AvrutaM jnAnaM?? should we understanding ajnAna has the potence to cover the jnAnaM?? if you simply go by vAkyArtha of the above statement, then you have to understanding clouds have the power to cover the sun?? is this the way of understanding this bhagavan vAni?? I didnot say anything about potence of jnAnAbhAva...I just said agrahAna is just tattvAgrahaNa it is nothing but absence of tattva jnAna i.e. jnAnAbhAva which again one of the three types of avidyA...I hope you are aware of the other two types of avidyA..

JS prabhuji :

cow story.......

bhaskar :

your cow story is good but irrelevant to the context of our present discussion...you were talking about nAnA jIva vAda & denying the eka jeeva vAda..with that you are implying each individual has his/her own avidyA...that forced me to ask those questions & I also said there in shankara vedatna there indeed a mention of eka as well as nAnA jIva vAda depending upon the context....If I go by your cow story, I'd say that the cow which is walked out realized that *no more cow* there in bondage...I hope you are aware that I am saying this from dArshtAntika reference...

JS prabhuji :

The ajnana is kalpita but it leads to bondage. One day one of the cows came to know that it was not bound and it walked away. That

doesn't mean that one part of ajnana is destroyed, as it is only kalpita.

bhaskar :

how do you think this kalpita ajnAna/avidyA gives birth to adhyAsa?? how do you think this kalpita ajnAna is bhAva rUpa?? can kalpita be a material cause for adhyAsa?? If it is material cause for adhyAsa it cannot be mere kalpita.. let me ask you a question, whether cows kalpita ignorance that they are in bondage is in the form agrahaNa rUpa avidyA or anyathAgrahaNa avidyA??

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

praNAms Sri Jai Shankara prabhuji

Hare Krishna

JS prabhuji :

Now you say adhyasa is superimposition;

bhaskar :

No, if you read carefully, you can make out the subtle difference between adhyAsa and adhyArOpa (superimposition)..adhyAsa here means anyathAgrahaNa that is the defect of the mind (reference vide adhyAsa bhAshya)..due to this, one mistakes one thing for another that which does not exist..that false appearance is called as adhyArOpa or adhyArOpita..If we take this to our vedanta chitana, the non dual brahman is misunderstood naturally by the mind such as deha, buddhi, ahaNkAra etc. .This misunderstanding (anyathAgrahaNa) which pertains to the mind is called adhyAsa..and due to this adhyAsa he assumes the brahman as nAma rUpAtmaka, jadAtmika multifarious world...this false appearance on brahman is called adhyArOpa. So the world is called adhyArOpita (or adhyastha or vikalpita). This is as you know, from the standpoint of common man's point of view...It is also called paratantra saMvrutti or loukika saMvrutti...Kindly see shankara bhAshya on 13-26..Here shankara takes the rope-snake, nacre-silver analogies and says false appearance of the snake and silver is adhyArOpita and the misconception as adhyAsa..That is the reason why we say, avidyA is adhyAsa and mAya is adhyArOpita...See sUtra bhAshya 2-1-14 where shankara says mAya is avidyA kalpita...

JS prabhuji :

it is false knowledge and it is Naisargika.

bhaskar :

these are all not my words...shankara himself says this in adhyAsa bhAshya :-))

JS prabhuji :

Then why should Sankara say it has a Nimitta? As per your contention in previous posts, that which is Naisargika should

not have any nimitta or karana? But Sankara says that Adhyasa has a nimitta. What can this nimitta be.

bhaskar :

dont you think you doubt is clarified by shankara himself in sUtra bhAshya?? when avidyA is said to be nimitta for adhyAsa it is kEvala nepa mAtram & kEvala shabda tarangaM?? Anyway, I would like to take this in a separate mail...

JS prabhuji :

It cannot be false Knowlege (mithyA-jnAna) because Adhyasa itself is mithyA-jnAna. It is like saying false knowledge is caused by false knowledge. That does'nt make any sense.

bhaskar :

prabhuji please note that we are not trying to find any cause for adhyAsa, OTOH, we have been telling avidyA is nothing but adhyAsa...so your above statement does not make any sense to those who say avidyA/adhyAsa is naisargika, anAdi...

JS prabhuji :

So it has to be only interpreted as false knowlegde is caused by ignorance (ajnana) which itself is false (ontological term). So, what panchapadikakara says makes lot of sense.

bhaskar :

Let me first get the confirmation from your goodself whether you are a strict follower of paNchapAdika vivaraNa school...then we can discuss what is sensible or otherwise..After seeing your comments on avidyA lesha I seriously doubt your belongingness to the vivaraNa school...Anyway, can you give me the detailed description of avidyA according to panchapAdikAkAra??

JS prabhuji :

Further I believe that he attended Sankara's classes in person and he has no need to misinterpret Sankara.

bhaskar :

I regret to inform you that neither paNchapAdikAkAra nor vivaraNakAra (unlike surEshwara) mentions they took lessons directly from Adi shankara in person...Anyway, I respect your traditional belief in this regard :-))

JS prabhuji :

I would rather go with what Padmapadacharya says rather than with someone who comes many centuries after Sankara and claims that all acharyas after Sankara are wrong.

bhaskar :

those who oppose post shankara vyAkhyAnakAra-s holding firm shankara's prasthAna trayi bhAshya as their valid & ultimate source..you must note that they are not simply talking in the air...Moreover, those who say some later vyAkhyAnakAra-s misinterpret shankara's works, would agree to the interpretation provided by the sureshvarAchArya, another direct desciple of shankara...Ofcourse, they donot want to bring-in even sureshvara (since he is later vyAkhyAnakAra) while discussing shankara siddhAnta based on shankara's prasthAna trayi bhAshya...

JS prabhuji :

Sankara himself says how one should treat such asampradayavits..I hope I need not repeat it here.

bhaskar :

prabhuji, I dont know what makes you to bring-in sampradAya in our discussion...I am sure, if I make my comments with the same tone as above about the mushrooming neo vedantic institutions in the name of shankara vedanta, Sri Ramachandra prabhuji, one of the moderators of this list, would certainly write a big *buddhi vAdaM* mail :-))...Hence, I'd refrain myself from making any comments on this...Let moderators of this list decide whether it is appropriate to talk about one's saMpradAya while discussing on the *siddhAnta*...Based on their comments, I would clarify you which saMpradAya I belong to & which saMpradAya you are representing...OK prabhuji, till then please wait...

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

I don't know about Sastriji but from whatever I have read from

Bhaskarji it will definitely not converge unless Bhaskarji changes

his views. Of course I can agree to disagree.

praNAms Sri JS prabhuji

Hare Krishna

It is not fair on your part to demand like this prabhuji...Ofcourse, you know I donot want to get into personals like this with my fellow advaitin :-))...I am surprised to see how moderators of this list keeping silence on these type of comments...If they entertain these type of comments from one side, I think they should allow other side also to voice their concerns...I once again leave your above comments to the observations of moderators of this list...

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Simply stated, adhyAsa (avidyA) is, therefore, wrong

knowledge. It is not absence of knowledge (jnAnAbhAva) as there is

not a moment knowledge doesn't take place. (Shri Bhaskarji might not

go with this.)

praNAms Sri Madathil Nair prabhuji

Hare Krishna

I would be the first person to happily admit that there is *always* jnAna without any traces of avidyA & there is no time we can say there is absence of svarUpa jnAna :-)) However, here we are talking about the different faces of ajnAna/avidyA & vrutti rUpa jnAna that is going to destroy that ajnAna...In that sense, we can say due to lack/absence of knowledge (in vrutti/pratyaya rUpa yathArtha jnAna) of our true svarUpa we are tempted to see ourselves as something different from what we actually are!!

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar