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

[Venkatraghavan S]

Thank you for the lovely explanation, Anand ji.

If we accept shukti ajnAna as the kAraNa for rajata, what is the kAraNa for
shukti?

Is it shukti ajnAna or brahma ajnAna?

a) *If it is shukti ajnAna*, then there are three things we must consider
1) as the same ajnAna can lead to either result, what leads to shukti in
one instance and rajata in another?
2) How does the nedam rajatam bAdha happen, because both the shukti and
rajatam have the same kAraNa, shukti ajnAna? To explain, I am seeing a
bhrama rajatam now due to shukti ajnAna. Normally, as long as the kAraNa
exists, the kArya must exist too. So as long as shukti ajnAna exists,
shukti rajatam must exist too. As shukti ajnAna is kAraNa for shukti too,
then how does the same cause destroy one effect and create the other?
3) if shukti ajnAna leads to shukti, and that shukti leads to shukti jnAna,
then as shukti jnAna and shukti ajnAna are virodhi, it is like saying the
cause creates an effect that destroys itself. Is such a thing possible, is
it not a upajIvya virodham?

b) *If it is brahma ajnAna*, then as shukti is born out of brahma ajnAna
and shukti rajata is born out shukti ajnAna, then it does differentiate
between the bhrama and bAdhaka jnAna pair, and the shukti rajata and shukti
pair. The first element of each pair is prAtibhAsika, the second element
vyAvahArika.

Some things to consider.
Regards,
Venkatraghavan

On 20 Aug 2017 4:45 a.m., "Anand Hudli via Advaita-l" <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

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
_______________________________________________
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