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

[Aditya Kumar]

But we can't say both are merely concepts. The definition of a phenomenon is : a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question.The definition of a concept is : an abstract idea. So both are not same. In my understanding, adhyaropa-apavada is not mere hypothesis-negation of hypothesis. Rather, it is explanation of 'Being' by superimposing qualities on 'Being' and later rejecting the qualities. 

When we say world is tuccha like hare's horn, then we are speaking from the absolute sense right? Else hare's horn should be available for perception? Hare's horn can be treated equally like the desk in front of me? How can there be an absolute position without a relative one? And what could be the examples given for sat asat and neither of them?

      From: Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
 To: Aditya Kumar <kumaraditya22 at yahoo.com> 
Cc: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 Sent: Sunday, 16 July 2017 10:10 AM
 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Debunking Drishti-Srishti Vada and Eka Jiva Vada - part 1
   
Namaste Adityaji,
On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Aditya Kumar <kumaraditya22 at yahoo.com> wrote:

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 brahma.

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?!
gurupAdukAbhyAm,
--praveen