[Advaita-l] DSV in the advaitasiddhi: no anavasthA doSha in dRShTi-sRShti

[Anand Hudli]

>>
>
I am simply refuting your dream analogy. Since dreams are dRShTi, which
involves Consciousness qualified by a vRtti, one cannot get away from
anavstha as charged in nyAmrita.
>>

Well, the proof is in the pudding! DS works exactly like a dream. If there
is anavasthA in DSV, then the same anavasthA would make dreams impossible.
But, we all know dreams occur.

Anand


On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 9:18 PM, Anand Hudli <anandhudli at hotmail.com> wrote:

> >>
>
> What do you mean by outside the scope of DSV?
>
> When you say avidya is anAdi, do not assume it exist from anAdi times. Do
> not forget, one of the definition of mithyatvaM is it is a pratiyOgi for
> negation at all three times (past, present & future). Since anAdi is time
> aspect of past and present, such anAdi six entities are equally
> non-existent as you are suppose to do niShEda in the past.
>
>
> By simply taking avidya (and other six entities) outside of scope of DSV
> will not protect them from definition of mithya.  So you have to admit,
> either DSV is short of covering all mithya entities (avyApti dOSha), or
> call those six entities are not mithya.
> >>
>
> This has been discussed before. I would not like to repeat myself. Please
> go through the archives and you will find the answers.
>
> Anand
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Anand Hudli <anandhudli at hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> >>
>> But the dream is not just pure vRitti prakriya. It needs Consciousness as
>> well. Otherwise you will end up with ridiculous position saying robots can
>> dream!
>>
>> So, since dream is Consciousness qualified by a vRtti, the original
>> objection by nyAyAmritakAra is still applicable. Nothing is refuted using
>> this dream analogy.
>> >>
>>
>> I have no time for stupidity. vRtti arising from avidyA does not mean
>> Consciousness is not involved. The Consciousness (cit) is the adhiShThAna
>> for avidyA. Between Consciousness and avidyA, there is no scope for
>> anavasthA, because both are *not* created as per DSV. They are anAdi.
>>
>> Anand
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Anand Hudli <anandhudli at hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> >>
>>> Saying "two vRittis that have contents of each other" itself is a piece
>>> of
>>> knowledge, who's knowledge is this? That begs again the need for
>>> consciousness delimited by vritti.  You are back to original anavastha
>>> dOSha.
>>>
>>> You can get away with this problem if you were to admit one of those two
>>> vRittis is svaprakASha and hence svayam-nirvahaka in serving this
>>> knowledge
>>> without need of Consciousness. But by saying so, you will end up with two
>>> conscious entities -- the original Conscious and this vRitti with
>>> svaprakAShatva.
>>> >>
>>>
>>> Just as in a dream there is a vRtti-jnAna of an object (example, pot)
>>> and its anuvyavasAya vRtti, i.e. jnAna of the form "I know the pot" (ghaTam
>>> ahaM jAnAmi), without the need for a third vRtti, in DSV too, these two
>>> kinds of vRttis are sufficient for knowledge of an object and its
>>> awareness/experience. The vRttis arise from avidyA, which is one of the six
>>> anAdi entities admitted to be outside the scope of DSV type of creation. So
>>> there is no anavasthA.
>>>
>>> Anand
>>>
>>>
>>
>