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

[Venkatraghavan S]

Thank you Praveen ji. It is good to hear from you after a while. Hope you
are well.

Thanks for sharing a relevant portion from the vivekachUDAmaNi vyAkhya - it
is very interesting that asatkAryavAdin-s like the naiyyAyika-s also
agree तथाप्यस्तु
कश्चिदतिरिक्तः पदार्थः - but I suppose they could be referring to that
sUkshmAvastha as an abhAva padArtha - they certainly have no qualms in
making inherently contradictory statements like "abhAva: asti".

Regards,
Venkatraghavan

On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 2:00 PM Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Venkatji,
> (My apologies, I am editing the subject line again to make more sense for
> those who track topics)
>
> On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 4:30 PM Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> What you say is true, but in my view, in the context of the ghaTa bhAShya,
>> shankarAchArya is not even going to paramArtha, even on a vyAvahArika
>> level, he is proving that abhAva is bhAvAtmakam.
>>
> ...
>
>> यथा घटाभावः पटादिरेव, न घटस्वरूपमेव ।न च घटाभावः सन्पटः अभावात्मकः ; किं
>> तर्हि ? भावरूप एव ।
>> एवं घटस्य प्राक्प्रध्वंसात्यन्ताभावानामपि घटादन्यत्वं स्यात् , घटेन
>> व्यपदिश्यमानत्वात् , घटस्येतरेतराभाववत् ; तथैव भावात्मकताभावानाम् ।
>
>  ...
>
>> But what does the bhAvarUpatva of abhAva mean? It means that the pot is
>> present in its sUkshma avasthA before and after creation. So the
>> bhAvAtmakatva of prAgabhAva and pradhvamsa abhAva is the sUkshmAvasthA of
>> the pot / kArya. As far as atyantAbhAva is concerned, that has nothing to
>> do with the pot, it is nothing but the ground on which the absence of the
>> pot is postulated.
>>
>
> Thanks for an interesting set of posts. On a related note, under
> Vivekachudamani verse 201, in the context of the question as to how can
> anAdi ajnAna and its kArya have nAsha, the example of prAgabhAva though
> anAdi having nAsha is discussed by HH Vyakhyanakara, which goes so:
> यथा तार्किकैः उत्पत्तिशून्यत्वेन अङ्गीक्रियमाणोपि तत्प्रतियोगिनि कार्ये
> जाते नश्यतीति दृष्टान्ते वैषम्यमापादयितुं शक्यम्, अविद्यातत्कार्यस्य
> अभावरूपत्वाभावात्, तथापि प्रागवस्थायाः भावरूपतया तत्रैव
> कार्याभिव्यक्त्यनन्तरमदृश्यमानायां उक्तार्थस्य वक्तुं शक्यत्वात्
> तार्किकैरपि प्रागभावनिरूपणावसरे "तथाप्यस्तु कश्चिदतिरिक्तः पदार्थः तथापि
> तस्य सप्रतियोगिकत्वे मानाभाव" इति स्वीकाराच्च। ... and further...
> कार्योत्पत्तेः प्राक् कार्यसमवायिकारणे इह कपाले घटो नास्तीति
> व्यवहारसाक्षिकः अभावः प्रागभाव इत्युच्यते।
>
> 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] */
>