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

[Ravi Kiran]

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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.
>

Yes


>
> *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.
>

Thanks Praveenji .. I see your point..



>
> 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] */
> ​
>