[Advaita-l] Dvaita Accepts Body Adhyāsa

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:35 PM, Venkatesh Murthy via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 1:55 AM, Srinath Vedagarbha
> <svedagarbha at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Venkatesh Murthy (वेङ्कटेशः
> > सीतारामार्यपुत्रः) <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> >
> > Even if you say that bhrama is anAdi it only means it co-exist with jIva
> > from anAdi and jIva never acquired it afresh. This only means such bhrama
> > must be self-same nature (svabhAva) of jIva, for the reason one will not
> > call something which acquired later as svbhAva. This logically leads to
> the
> > conclusion that you cannot get rid of self-same nature bhrama without
> > destroying the the very dharmi chaitanya itself. This means that
> chaitanya
> > never can realize it is indeed Brahman.
>
>
> You are saying as if the Bhrama is really there in the Self. If it is
> really there in Self it will be Svabhava.
>
> But if Bhrama is not really there it cannot be Svabhava.


Essentially what you are saying is that one having bhramA (of self as same
body) itself is a bhramA. Now same question -- where is this second bhramA
coming from? You are on your way of nice anavasthA.



>
> > Btw, one wonders why does advaitins interested in anAdi argument when
> time
> > itself is mithya according to them? In other words, notion of "time" is
> not
> > possible unless you have adhyAsa. You cannot have adhyAsa from anAdi
> times
> > argument unless you have notion of "time".
>
> Time is existing only for Vyavaharika purposes. The instruction of
> Guru is happening in Vyavhara only. Therefore we accept time. But in
> Brahman stage there is no time.
>

When nature of adhyAsa is being debated, bringing in vyavahAra (which is
the result of adhyAsa) to justify argument for adhyAsa/bhramA -- is an case
of aatmAShrya flaw.

/sv