[Advaita-l] mAya and avidyA are not synonyms

[Shashwata Shastri]

Dear Bhaskar Ji,

Since this avidyA is abhAva rUpa it can be effaced completely after the
dawn of jnana if avidyA is a vastu, a thing or bhAva then it cannot be
eradicated by any dosage of jnana /// भाबत्बं चाभाबबिलक्षणत्बमात्रं
बिबक्षितम्‌, अतआरोपिताभाबोपदानाज्ञानेऽपाभाबबिलक्षणत्बस्बीकाराब्यप्तिः।
-अद्बैतसिद्धि-मधुसूदन सरस्बती।

Best Regards,

Shashwata Chowdhury

On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> praNAms
> Hare Krishna
>
> If I remember right, I had written about this earlier also in either of
> the groups but don't remember.
>
> Before equating mAya and  avidyA atleast we should first understand what
> is mAya and avidyA as per bhAshya.
>
> According to shruti, geetAchArya and bhAshyakAra,  mAya is some sort of
> Shakti, which is brahmAnanya, nitya, akshara, anirvachaneeya.  And shankara
> categorically states that we have to accept this mAya Shakti in brahman if
> not brahma will not be a creator and whole srushti prakriya goes into thin
> air and shruti which talks extensively on srushti prakriya becomes
> apramANya.  Na hi tayA vinA parameshwarasya srashtutvaM siddhyati, Shakti
> rahitasya tasya pravruttyanupapatteH.  And elsewhere bhAshyakAra further
> confirms through mAyAshakti only brahman would get the pravrutti to do this
> creation but in his svarUpa he always nishkriya.  paramAtmanastu
> svarUpavyapAshrayaM audAseenyaM mAyAvyapAshrayaM cha pravartakatvaM.  Like
> this between kAraNa brahma and kArya jagat there exist a Shakti and that
> Shakti is the reason for the vyAkruta jagat of nAma rUpa.  Though it has
> been said that this Shakti is in between kAraNa and kArya, this Shakti
> belongs to brahman (kAraNa) only and not a separate force.  This has been
> clearly stated by geetAchArya mama svarUpabhUtA madeeya mAyA and
> bhAshyakAra confirms this by stating : kAraNasya AtmabhUtA shaktiH
> shakteshcha AtmabhUtaM kAryaM, sA shaktiH brahmaiva ahaM Shakti Shakti
> matOH ananyatvAt.  And the paryAya pada-s for this Shakti / mAyA is
> prakruti, vaishNavi mAya, mUla prakruti, akshara, avyaktA etc. This Shakti
> is divine not dOsha or anishta like jeevAshrita avidyA.  Hence geetAchArya
> affectionately says it is mine (mama mAyA)  : daivee hyeshA guNamayee mama
> mAyA duratyayA.  This mAyA has been ulogised as parameshwari in some
> purANa-s as well,  that is the reason why we have the names like mAyAdevi,
> mAyAvati, yOga mAya etc.  not avidyAvati, avidyA devi etc. :) And again
> this mAya,  as per geetAchArya has two prakruti-s i.e. para and apara.  As
> we all know aparA prakruti is paNcha tanmAtra-s and samashti BMI of
> hiraNyagarbha (ashta vidhA prakruti) and para prakruti is jeeva who is
> ultimately nothing but brahman.  Since for this aparA prakruti brahman is
> the only abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa this aparA prakruti is nothing
> different from brahman.  Hence shruti says AtmanaH AkAsha saMbhUtaH,
> akAshAt vAyuH, vAyOragniH, agnerApaH, ApaH pruthivi etc. And this mAyA is
> anirvachaneeya as well since from the kArya drushti it is not brahman since
> there is no bhinnatva in brahman no variety in brahman (neha nAnAsti
> kiMchana) but at the same time this bhinnatva does not have any independent
> existence apart from that ekaM.  Shankara gives foam, water example for
> this and this anirvachaneeya mAyA is avyakta.  avyaktA hi sA mAyA
> tattvAnyatva nirUpaNasya ashakyatvAt.  And this avyAkruta /avyakta Shakti
> of brahman before creation called mUla prakruti which has been
> categorically addressed as brahman only.  yA mUlaprakrutiH abhyupagamyate
> tadeva cha nO brahma.  Now, if we replace these vaishNavi mAya, avyakta,
> avyAkruta, mUla prakruti, akshara words with the avidyA, the arthahAni is
> quite conspicuous.  Because avidyA which has been defined in Advaita is
> entirely different from the above divine power i.e. mAya.
>
> So, what is avidyA ??  We don't get better place other than adhyAsa
> bhAshya to know what is avidyA according to bhAshyakAra.  The point to be
> noted that in this comprehensive analysis of adhyAsa shankara nowhere
> equates avidyA with mAya and say avidyA is anirvachaneeya and this avidyA
> is tattvAnyatva nirUpaNasya ashakyaM.  OTOH, by taking the example of day
> to day activities shankara explains the nature of avidyA which results in
> adhyAsa.  Those who have studied this in detail know that avidyA is
> agrahaNa , ajnAna or jnAnAbhAva that jeeva does not know that he is
> brahman.  And this not-knowing the real nature of his results in
> mis-conception (adhyAsa, anyathA grahaNa, vipareeta buddhi atasmin tat
> buddhiH) And shankara in general calls this adhyAsa itself as avidyA (vide
> adhyAsa bhAshya).  And elsewhere shankara confirms that unlike mAyA  Shakti
> which is brahmAnanya, avidyA does not have any existence in brahman /
> Atman...sA cha avidyA nAtmanaH svAbhAvikO dharmaH because Atman is ever
> shuddhaM, nirmalaM, avidyAmala rahitaM, mukta svarUpaM.  And this has been
> further clarified by shankara kAtaka shruti bhAshya that avidyA is only
> jeeva's mess in reality it does not pertains to him.  lOkO hi avidyayA sva
> Atmana adhyastayA kAma karmOdbhavaM duHkhaM anubhavati na tu sA
> paramArthataH svAtmani.  Since this avidyA is abhAva rUpa it can be effaced
> completely after the dawn of jnana if avidyA is a vastu, a thing or bhAva
> then it cannot be eradicated by any dosage of jnana.  Na hi bhAvAnAM
> niranvayO nirupAkhyO vinAshaH saMbhavati it is just because nabhAvO vidyate
> sataH says geetAchArya.  By giving the cataract example, shankara explains
> this avidyA / adhyAsa is karaNa dOsha not relating to kshetrajnA, and
> jeeva's samsara is because of this anishta avidyA.
>
> Underthese circumstance, when mAyA is denoted as brahma Shakti and avidyA
> is explained as jeeva's weakness, when one has the ashraya in brahman and
> another has the Ashraya of mAyA kArya, when one is anirvachaneeya and
> another one is nirvachaneeya ( an entire chapter has been dedicated to
> explain avidyA /adhyAsa I don't know where it has been said that avidyA is
> anirvachaneeya).  And when one is compared to divine power and another one
> is compared to tAmasa pratyaya and when one is compared to 'anna' and
> another one is compared to 'visha', and when one is the kAraNa for the
> srushti lAya and another one is the kAraNa for ahaMkAra mamakAra,
> bhOktrutva, kartrutva...etc. etc.  One cannot illogically compare these
> different aspect as one and the same just  going by eka vAkya of
> bhAshyakAra where he assers : avidyAtmikA hi beeja shaktiH avyakta pada
> nirdeshya.
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>