[Advaita-l] avidya is Agantuka

[H S Chandramouli]

Sri Venkatraghavan Ji,



I did not intend to mean anywhere that <<  the manifestation of कारण शरीर
is limited to सुषुप्ति >>. Anyway this could form the subject matter for
another thread perhaps.


But for the present we will revert back to the subject of our focus in this
thread. And that is, quoting from one of your previous posts ,  <<  I
suppose we are debating what

Anandagiri AchArya is referring to by the manifestation of avidya. >>.


I am quoting below from the latest post by Sri Subrahmanian Ji


<< 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 .>>.



I am not clear what is referred to by the statement << This is what is
meant by 'agantuka' in the current discussion >>. Which is meant by
agantuka – seed ('tattva apratibodha' ) or vikshepa ??  I am not sure. If
seed is meant along with its effect of आवरण ('tattva apratibodha' ) , that
is what I have been saying also all along. Sri Subrahmanian Ji may please
clarify. If my understanding is wrong, then I will offer further
justification for my understanding.


You could also confirm your understanding of this post by Sri Subrahmanian
Ji.


Regards


On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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
>