[Advaita-l] Debunking Drishti-Srishti Vada and Eka Jiva Vada - part 1

Praveen R. Bhat bhatpraveen at gmail.com
Sun Jul 16 00:40:09 EDT 2017

Namaste Adityaji,

On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Aditya Kumar <kumaraditya22 at yahoo.com>

> World is a phenomenon. Maya is a definition/concept.
​Both being concepts are just that, nothing more. For those who need an
explanation, a concept is brought in as an adhyAropa so that they can
resolve the doubt and move forward ​to apavAda and on to satya brahma. That
doesn't mean that one can hold on to adhyAropa as satya and not go to
apavAda at all. Those who hold on to the crutches even when they can walk,
and call those who run as wrong are not benefited.

> We can say world is tuccha. But how does saying maya is tuccha makes
> sense? It is like saying Anirvachaniya/indescribable is
> Tuccha/non-existent. So that establishes only sat and asat are possible.
> Then we have to say world is asat like hare's horn.
​Your confusion is visible in above three lines. 1st line says you are okay
with world is tuccha = ​asat like hare's horn. 3rd line says you are
hesitant to say that the world is asat = tuccha like hare's horn. Please
decide your position based on your own doubts or lack thereof, not because
a certain Dasgupta says, which too, you partially agree and partially
reject by ardhajaratinyAya that you seem to apply everywhere. That is if
your goal is mokSha. If your goal is to be only a critic, you're welcome to
that as well.

If we say it is only from the absolute position, then we have to accept
> maya.
I hope you are not saying that from absolute position, you have to accept
mAyA, else I am sorry to say that I doubt your absolute view.​

It's not a question of whether we need maya to explain Advaita.
​Definitely not, again you have it topsyturvy. Maya is needed to ​explain
dvaita prapancha inspite of Advaita for those who question nirguNatva of

Rather it is a denial of such a concept/possibility even provisionally. So
> in a way, Prakasananda says SDV is fundamentally wrong and DSV alone is the
> truth.
​Please understand the approaches of SDV and DSV and who are each targeted
towards.​ First off, the goal of both is the same. SDV comes from the world
you see, gives it a reality, then a provisional reality, then removes that
and reaches you to brahman that you already are. DSV starts with you being
brahman and doesn't let you slip from it. It resolves all doubts by saying
its like a dream. Think of the example of the blind men and the elephant.
SDV uses various creation prakriyAs to explain the blind men that each see
the elephant as a snake feeling the tail, as a hose feeling the trunk, as a
pillar feeling the leg, as a wall feeling the body. DSV is like the mahut
or the king riding the elephant. Does he endorse the views of blind men?!

The fact that you insist these are only prakriyas and we can choose
> whichever proves that, one need not arrive at DSV at any point until
> moksha.
​If one is at "the point" of mokSha, what use is a prakriyA, be it DSV?!


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list