[Advaita-l] 'I do not know' is bhāvarūpa ajnana

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste Raviji,
​
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Nothing separated from the self by avidyA doesn't mean self is not hidden
>> by avidyA to the same antaHkaraNa that is one with the self, else why would
>> anyone wake up bound.
>>
>
> *When you say, "one with the self", in That, as ekibhUta or ekibavana or
> samprasAda, there is no distinction, whatsoever .. *
>
​That lack of distinction in suShupti is of no use to anyone, but the
waker. The same understanding holds that even in waking there is no
distinction for the perspective of turIya. That is mokShakAraka.

*all logic, attributing bhAva rUpa or otherwise, comes only upon waking :)
> *
>

​And only upon waking do come efforts for samAdhi too. :) Attributing
bhAvarUpA works, otherwise doesn't; else we will have no argument with
shUnyavAdins, who say that abhAvarUpa shUnya causes something! This is the
reason that Tikakaras insist that avidyA is not abhAvarUpA. I am
particularly okay even with bhAvAbhAvAbhyAm anirvachanIyA if you insist it
is not bhAvarUpA, which is same as saying yatkinchidbhAvarUpA said
elsewhere.

gurupAdukAbhyAm,
--Praveen R. Bhat
/* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
That owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
​