[Advaita-l] adhyAsa - part V

[Srikrishna Ghadiyaram]

Hari Om !!

--- Jay Nelamangala <jay at r-c-i.com> wrote:
> praNam Bhaskar prabhujI,
> 
> Thanks for your comments.
> 
> One need not be a vEdaantin to understand the 
> adhyArOpa of silver-conch,
> crystal-red flower, snake-rope,  sky-sunlight etc.  
> Physicists have very
> well explained why the atmosphere in the sky makes 
> only blue light
> get diffracted.  I am still waiting for someone to
> articulate that physics
> funda  :-)
> 
> The question arises, when vEdAntins take the same
> examples such as
> crystal-red flower and  conclude,  "similarly Atma
> and anAtma are also
> superimposed".
> In the case of crystal-red flower,  it is the
> proximity and reflecting red
> flower
> that brings redness to the crystal.
> 
> We all know that examples can only be used to
> disprove theories, and
> even a thousand examples will not  make a theory.  
> So, a theory has to
> stand on its own,  an example may help understand
> that theory better.
> 
> Ex:  If I line up 1000 black cows and make a theory
> that "all cows are
> black"
> then  all you need is a single white cow to disprove
> that theory.
> 

You said it right. Advaita Vedanta should not CONCLUDE
'Adhyasa' of Atma and anAtma because colour of a red
flower gets superimposed/reflected in crystal. But,
who told you that Advaita Vedanta uses this as a
'CONCLUDING' evidence of Atma-anAtma adhyAsa ?? It is
meant to be an illustration only, as you wanted.

But, do you see they did not say that the same red
colour gets superimposed in an opaque material. !! i.e
the same Atma gets reflected in my opaque body through
sukshma sareera etc.. through 'IDENTIFICATION' not
through 'SUPERIMPOSITION'. It was just meant to be an
example/illustration/anology. Every illustration has
its own limitations. Otherwise the illustrated would
have remained the 'original' itself. 

If it is simply stated that the Atma and anatmA get
mutual-superimposition, then someone will ask what is
mutual-superimposition. Just for this purpose an
example is given to illustrate how the qualities can
get transferred to another entity (in proximity)!.
Here it is not said that Atma is crystal.

The example is only illustarating that this One and
Only Chid Vastu of the Universe gets very intricately
mixed up with (its own projection) anAtma. In this
perspective, I do not see any objection to adhyasa.

Om Namo Narayanaya !!

Srikrishna


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com