[Advaita-l] jnAnAbhAva (was HH Sri Paramananda Bharathi Swamiji attained mukti)

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste Sudanshu ji, Sadaji,

On Fri 2 Aug, 2019, 23:45 Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l, <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

>
> The way I used A's effect is not in the sense of effect of material cause.
>
Oh, but avidyA is material cause.

Just take A=Brahma-jnAna and B= A's effect = ~shoka-moha. It will make
> sense and argument remains valid. A=>B and ~B=>~A.

I'm sure you yourself can see the error in such justification. There is
vaishamyadosha. The effect is an abhAvarUpa here and cause is bhAvarUpa!

On Fri 2 Aug, 2019, 20:35 kuntimaddi sadananda, <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>
> wrote:  Praveenji - PraNAms My understanding may be wrong. Bavaruupatvam
> requires not just existence but should have a capacity to project. If someone
> asks me ' Do you know gaagaabuubu?" I can say -never heard of it. I do
> not know what it is? - response by my mind? - at this stage only aavarana
> due to avidya. When someone points to object on the floor that I also see,
> and he says that is 'gaagaabuubu'. Now the ignorance of gaagaabuubu is
> gone. At this stage, there is no vikshepa involved. - only the naama aspect
> is established - just one example

For simplicity, let's say I more or less agree with your example case.
However, there is vaishamya here as well...


Projection can start only if have some partial knowledge of an object but
> not complete knowledge as it

... As is the case with AtmA. One knows not oneself as brahman but one
starts explaining oneself as if one knows oneself using the BMI.

- there is an object there - 5 feet long - coiled - soft when I stopped on
> it and is lying on the aisle. 'There is (something)' - the projection of
> the mind viskhepa later as it is a snake, etc. Question is only do we
> attribute the vikshepa shakti to avidya or to the mind which is empowered
> by maaya shakti at the individual level to project the snake on the object
> that is perceived with incomplete attributes?

One has to associate both shaktis to avidyA as well, else lacking vikshepa,
avidyA won't be able to project a snake. If one sees a snake, since it's
mAyAshakti, everyone would see snake!

Lack of knoweldge is one thing but projection of something else where the
> object is different  -to separate the aavarana vs vishepa - or ignorance vs
> maaya. This may be samantics but separation makes it easy to comprehend
> that muula avidya is gone but projection continues for a jeevan mukta as
> long as BMI losts.

I understand that this simplistic approach maybe helpful but it may as well
be said that vikshepa goes away when the sharIra, kArya, goes away; or if
you prefer: individuality, avidyAkArya, has gone away with avidyAnAsha but
the world seen, mAyAkArya, remains (but not seen separately from oneself
since avidyA is gone).

gurupAdukAbhyAm,
--praveen