[Advaita-l] Locus of maayaa and avidyaa

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Sadananda prabhuji
Hare Krishna

1. avidyaa either at jiiva level or maayaa at Iswara level are also part 
of vyaavahaarika only - hence mithyaa - hence sat asat vilakshanNam - 
hence bhaava-abhaava vilakshaNam too. 

>  avidyA is not anirvachaneeya and according to vyAkhyAnakAra-s avidyA is 
NOT bhAvAbhava vilakshaNa it is bhAva rUpa and the upAdAna kAraNa to the 
adhyAsa and kindly note this upAdAna kAraNa bhAva rUpa avidyA is NOT 
jnAnAbhAva, it is something special and separate from jnAnAbhAva.  However 
prabhuji I agree with you that avidyA is at jeeva level only, Ishwara does 
not have this avidyA which shankara also confirms :-))


However the sopaadika adhyaasa remains as long as BMI of the jiivan mukta
remains since it is Iswara sRishTi and not jiiva sRishTi. Hence here 
vidyaa of
jiiva does not eliminate the maayaa of Iswara. 


>  If adhyAsa (sOpAdhika or nirupAdhika or whatever it is!!) continues 
even in muktAvasthA in what way we can call the jnAni as jeevan muktA?? 
where shankara says jeevan mukta-s would continue to experience the 
sOpAdhika adhyAsa even after the dawn of 'ekatva' jnAna??  On the other 
hand shankara categorically says that which the jnAni sees prior to jnAna 
as 'asarvaM' would become 'sarvaM' after the jnAna..there is no bAhya lOka 
(external world) apart from him, there is no vision for him that is Atma 
vyatireka...sarvaM hi asmAkaM Atmabhutameva sarvasya cha vayaM AtmabhUtaH, 
pUrvaM avidyayA asarva Aseet punarvidyayA avidyApanaye 'sarvO bhavati' are 
the shankara's clarification to this effect...As far as my knowledge goes 
no where shankara says jnAni would continue to see the sOpAdhika adhyAsa 
in the form of nAma & rUpa..for him everything Atman only nothing more, 
nothing less than THAT..


This distinction is very important - 

>  Yes, this distinction would vanish once the 'ekatva' jnana 
dawns...paramArtha jnAna would eliminates avidyA/adhyAsa completely 
without any trace, if the Atmaikatva jnAna eliminates only one type of 
adhyAsa i.e. nirupAdhika adhyAsa then through what means the sOpAdhika 
adhyAsa goes??  Only single part of adhyAsa (nirupAdhika) nivrutti cannot 
be considered as 'ekatva' jnAna, since this ekatva jnAna would still 
suffer from sOpAdhika adhyAsa !!

hence I feel it is better to differentiate avidyaa and maayaa, 

>  Yes, this is what I too insisting...using both avidyA and mAya as 
paryAya pada-s (synonyms) indiscriminately and interchangeably would do no 
good to siddhAnta pratipAdana. 

even though the original cause for all this is muula avidya loused in 
Brahman. 

> for that matter braman is the ONLY kAraNa for all these, hence we say in 
advaita brahman is abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa..This does not mean 
brahman is the Ashraya for the bhAvarUpi avidyA because avidyA is abhAva 
rUpa (jnAnAbhAva).

Here we should not say muula avidya is loused on jiiva - since all jiivas 
have this.

>  since the shAstra's aim is to educate the jeeva and getting rid of 
'his' avidyA, I dont think there is any requirement to bring-in mUlAvidyA 
which is not pertains to jeeva at any level !!..Moreover, if the jeeva can 
only getting rid of his own avidyA (tUlAvidyA) through jnana then  there 
is no chance for him to eradicate the mUlAvidyA which anyway is not within 
the paridhi of this individual jeeva :-))  So, either way introduction of 
mulAvidyA at brahma level (!!??) is totally unwarranted and unjustified 
here. 


It is better to call this as maayaa and forming Brahman as Iswara as his 
shakti for
creation. 

>  I think it would be appropriate to call mUla prakruti or akshara 
instead of mUlAvidyA because shankara himself in sUtra bhAshya says that 
which is called 'mUla prakruti' is nothing but 'brahma'...yA mUla 
prakrutiH abhyupagamyate tadeva cha nO brahma'...  na ksharati ashnute cha 
iti nityatva vypitvAbhyAM aksharaM parameva brahma...On the other hand if 
we say mulAvidyA is brahmAshrita and brahmAnanya then we have to accept 
the fact the brahma is tained by this mUlAvidyA eternally even after the 
paramArtha jnAna of the jeeva !!?? 


3. My only statement is that the confusion get
compounded when we interchangeably use avidyaa and maayaa in the same
connotation. The misunderstandings as stated in these discussions follow.

>  Yes, I completely agree with you prabhuji. 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar