[Advaita-l] Why brahma jnAna is capable of sarva nivritti

[V Subrahmanian]

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Srinath Vedagarbha via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste,
> >
> >  न च - बाधकधियां भ्रमतद्धेत्वज्ञानदोषाधयस्तद्रष्ट्रादीनामबाधकत्वं
> > दृष्टमिति
> > कथं ब्रह्मज्ञानस्य तद्बाधकत्वं घटतामिति - वाच्यं | To this, the
> siddhikAra
> > says, do not argue thus.
> >
> > We see instances where such all encompassing nivritti is possible.
> >
> > यत्र हि स्वप्ने द्रष्टारं दुष्टकरणवन्तं कल्पयित्वा तस्य भ्रमं कल्पयति,
> तत्र
> > जागरज्ञानेन सर्वेषां निवृत्तिदर्शनात् | Consider the following example.
> > Suppose there is a man who dreams of some person (ie not him) mistaking a
> > shell for silver. Here,  the dream person who mistakes the shell for
> silver
> > (drashTA), his ignorance of the dream shell (ajnAna), his faulty eyesight
> > in the dream that led to the mistake (doSha), his perception of the
> silver
> > (bhrama) and the silver (bhrama viShaya) are all seen in the dream. All
> > these are sublated upon the dreamer waking up.
> >
> >
> This example is nested brama (brama within brama). One is outer and another
> is inner. The inner one itself a viShya of the outer. The entire set of
> inner bhrama -- drashTA(dream person undergoing shell-siver brama), the
> bhrama viShaya (siver-shell), the brAnti (thinking shell as silver) and the
> nivritti-jnAna (correcting knowledge 'this is shell only'); is itself
> bhrama viShaya of the outer bhrama (of the dreamer). Even though entire
> package of inner bhrama is bhAdita (sarva nivritti), nevertheless it does
> not amount to sarva nivritti for the outer bhrama. At the end we still have
> drashTa (the dreamer), his pramA, viShya of his bhrama, adhisTana (dreamer
> himself) etc. still remains. Where is sarva nivritti here?
>

The example was given only to show sambhāvanā of such a wholesale nivṛtti.
The siddhantin is not claiming that by that example the dreamer, etc. are
also negated. If this is understood the rest of the questions you ask will
not arise.

>
>