[Advaita-l] avidya is Agantuka

[V Subrahmanian]

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 9:10 PM, sreenivasa murthy via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Dear Sri Venkataraghvan,
> You write : "That was what I was trying to say in shorthand - but the
> important thing
> was to establish that आवरण was very much present in the waking state."
> You want to establish that AvaraNa was very much present in the waking
> state.What is that AvaraNa?How do you know that there is AvaraNa in your
> waking state? Who has seen it? Or is it a concept which has been told in an
> ancient text ?


The Mandukya Kārikā 1.15 is to be studied:

अनादिमायया सुप्तो यदा जीवः प्रबुध्यते ।
अजमनिद्रमस्वप्नमद्वैतं बुध्यते तदा ॥ १६ ॥
भाष्यम्
योऽयं संसारी जीवः, सः उभयलक्षणेन तत्त्वाप्रतिबोधरूपेण बीजात्मना,
अन्यथाग्रहणलक्षणेन चानादिकालप्रवृत्तेन मायालक्षणेन स्वापेन, ममायं पिता
पुत्रोऽयं नप्ता क्षेत्रं गृहं पशवः, अहमेषां स्वामी सुखी दुःखी क्षयितोऽहमनेन
वर्धितश्चानेन इत्येवंप्रकारान्स्वप्नान् स्थानद्वयेऽपि पश्यन्सुप्तः,
In the above bhaṣyam we can see that the āvaraṇa has been said to be of the
nature of 'tattva apratibodha', that is, not-knowing of the Truth, which is
the seed. For what? For the anyathā grahaṇa, which is the effect, the
sprout of the seed: vikṣepa. This is present in the two states jāgrat and
svapna. The 'seed' is present in all states as the fundamental ignorance.
This is what is meant by 'agantuka' in the current discussion, while the
'seed' is admitted to be anādi and present in all states, through all
janmas. till one becomes enlightened, which is what the above verse finally
says.
The earlier few kārikās too will be useful in the above study.

This article too may be of use in this regard:

https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/2010/05/05/the-praajnah-of-the-mandukya-upanishad/



warm regards
subrahmanian.v


> Has one accepted that concept blindly without verification in his own
> anuBava?  These doubts crossed my mind while I was going through the above
> passage of yours.
> With warm and respectful regards,Sreenivasa Murthy
>
>
>
>       From: Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>  To: H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> Cc: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>  Sent: Wednesday, 13 January 2016 7:21 PM
>  Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] avidya is Agantuka
>
> Namaste Sri Chandramouli ji,
>
> I'm somewhat confused. I thought you were saying earlier that the
> manifestation of कारण शरीर is limited to सुषुप्ति. However, the latest
> emails indicate that you agree that कारण शरीर is manifest in all three
> अवस्थाs. I agree with this btw, but it appears a change to your earlier
> position (of course, I simply may not have understood what you were saying
> earlier).
>
> Coming back to the topic at hand, we are in agreement that the
> manifestation of अविद्या occurs in all three states. The manifestation is
> of the nature of association with a body शरीर अभिमानं (this you may not
> agree with, see next paragraph). It is this manifestation that is आगन्तुकं.
> If this is the interpretation of Sri Anandagiri AchArya and Sri
> ShankarAchArya, I am in agreement.
>
> If शरीर अभिमानं is taken to be the meaning of अभिव्यक्तं, that implies the
> inclusion of both आवरण रूप अविद्या and विक्षेप रूप अविद्या as the objects
> of the adjective आगन्तुकी. However, here it may be argued the context of
> the बृहदारण्यक मंत्र is सुषुप्ति, and hence only आवरण is being described as
> आगन्तुकं - as विक्षेप isn't present then. I'm ok with that too, but would
> still contend that it is possible to explain विक्षेप as आगन्तुक in the
> manner described above, if the context isn't सुषुप्ति.
>
> The purpose of the example about the awareness of "I" in the waking/dream
> states was merely to establish the presence of आवरणं in those states.
>
> The example is a diversion from the main topic, but since you had some
> objections to the example, I thought I will clarify.
>
> The attribution of "I" the sAkshi Atma to "I" associated with the sharIra
> (which is the object of the awareness) is indeed विक्षेप, but it requires
> that साक्षी/आत्म अज्ञानं be present for that विक्षेप to happen.
>
> The mind should not have known that what is denoted by the term "I" is the
> sAkshi the Atma (आवरणं), and falsely believes "I" to be the 2 sharIras.
>
> The awareness of "I" is विक्षेप, I wasn't implying that the "I" that the
> mind is aware of is Atma.
>
> That was what I was trying to say in shorthand - but the important thing
> was to establish that आवरण was very much present in the waking state. It
> appears from your latest email that you agree with that.
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>