[Advaita-l] Who has Ajnana/Maya?

[Praveen R. Bhat]

​Namaste Kalyanji,
​


On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 12:15 AM, Kalyan <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> // The reality of
>  the "really affected" ​is at the same level of
>  reality as
>  the world which is vyAvahArika.
>  On the pAramarthikA level, the jIva which
>  is
>  brahmAtman, is not really affected.//
>
>
> If the Atman getting affected by misery is a vyavahArika satya, then there
> is no guarantee that moksha is final.
>
> ​Where do you get Atman is vyAvahArika satya from my statement?! The
guarantee of mokSha as final is only due to it being nitya, not Apti. Atman
is nityamukta even when *appearing* as badha. This will remain the AV
siddhAnta, however one understands it.


> I find nothing in the bhAshya on 13.2 that logically addresses the
> question.
>
You say that there is no logical answer, but you are using all arguments
from the very bhAShya and posing that itself as a pUrvapakSha. eg., mokSha
not being final is an Aropa that bhashyakAra makes on the pUrvapakshin's
interpretation. If you are really interested, study Br. Up. 1.4.10 bhAShya.
Moreover, logic as per AV is shruti-based. You seem to rely on mere logic.
If that, I am sorry to say that, then nothing can ever solve the logical
problem for you.
​

> The statement of Des Cartes is not causal. It is inferential.

If so, as I said earlier, he should have said: I think, therefore I "know"
I exist.​



> Yes, I have to exist first to think, perceive etc. What Des Cartes is
> saying is that the latter implies the former. It is because I think and
> perceive, that I can be sure of my existence.
>
​​Then as per your own assessment of deep-sleep, you cannot be sure of your
existence then because you didn't think then!


>
> Since I have memory on waking up, I do not need others to tell me that I
> was unconscious in dreamless sleep.
>
This is exactly what is called as pratyabhij~nA which I said is possible
only if consciousness which is you was existent witness during deep-sleep.
The memory has only experiences, which proves that something was collected
to be recollected. An unconscious entity cannot collect memories to recall.
​

> If you have seen persons having an epileptic seizure, you will probably
> know that after the episode, some patients don't even know what happened to
> them. They are in a completely confused state due to short term memory
> loss. This cannot be the case if their consciousness was intact during the
> episode.
>
You are confusing with consciousness that I talk of versus the
consciousness which you refer to as "their" consciousness. If consciousness
wasn't there, the person will not know that he is the same one who went
into coma who came out. Not only will he not know, the others will not know
too. The memory loss has nothing to do with existence of consciousness.
​

> // Its shUnyavAda to say
>  there is no
>  consciousness in deep sleep,//
>
>
> I am curious to know which shUnyavada text says the above.
>
​I am not an expert on shUnyavAda texts; I know it from pUrvapakSha in
bhAShya. And if it is not technically right, let me use it grammatically as
a vAda of shUnyam vadituM shIlaM asya, which is non-existence of oneself,
be it during deep-sleep.


I do not want to run into circles since I had to repeat what I said
earlier, so let me ask you as to do you really agree that
consciousness=existence=Atman is not there in deep sleep or are you just
saying it?