[Advaita-l] DSV in the advaitasiddhi: adhyAsa is substantiated

[Anand Hudli]

Shri Venkatraghavanji,

>>
Excellent post. If the shukti was not existing when the rajatam was seen,
then is it shukti ajnAna that leads to rajata bhrama? Or is it brahma
ajnAna?

>>

shukti-ajnAna does lead to the bhrama of rajata, although both rajata and
the bAdhakajnAna "nedaM rajatam" are prAtibhAsika. In fact, the
pUrvapakShin raises another objection based on this, to which the answer
given is that the bAdhakajnAna does not have to be of a higher order of
reality to cancel the bAdhya.

>>
Alternatively, given we are in  drishTi sriShTi prakriyA, is it drishTi that
leads to shukti rajata sriShTi, and not shukti ajnAna? Thus as far as this
prakriyA is concerned, there is no difference between shukti rajatam and
rajatam.
>>
It seems to me that due to the prAtibhAsika nature of everything (save
Brahman), the "sting" is taken out of adhyAsa. It is almost like bhrama
jnAna just being replaced by the bAdhaka jnAna, having no "Aha!" moment of
realization. This is perhaps explained by the fact that a DSV follower is
already an advanced sAdhaka, very close to realizing Brahman. For such a
person, negating a mundane illusion such as silver-nacre does not hold much
value. The nacre is not any more real than the illusory silver.
PrakAshAnanda has a different explanation on page 170 of the English
translation. According to him, the person in question never sees the
illusory object, example snake in place of a rope. He sees the rope but due
to being "bhrAnta", he thinks it is a snake. To the question, "Did he never
see a snake at all?" (tatkiM sarpaH na pratipanna eva?), he answers,
"Undoubtedly!" But this against experience, since one feels he/she saw a
snake where in fact, there was a rope. To this, PrakAshAnanda says "this is
against experience alright but experience of a deluded person." So there is
no harm done. It is only when something is against experience of an
"abhrAnta" person, it is a problem.

Anand