[Advaita-l] A short explanation on 'adhanDAkAra vRtti' by Sri Mani Dravid Sastrinah

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Hari Om Bhaskar ji,

he has not elaborated. It is a very short video. I can share my tuppence
though ☺

(2) Yes. That is pratyagatma/kshetrajna who is the seer of that
sAkShAtkAra-vrittI. This is the entity which witnesses the absence of
ahamkAra in deep sleep.

(5) It is basically Neti-Neti. Atman is not a viShaya. Therefore,
AtmAkAra-vrittI will naturally not refer to *any* viShaya.

Regards.
Sudhanshu.


On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 11:15 AM Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> (1) SAkShAtkAra is vritti-rUpa.Vritti is within manas. (actually a
> specific shape of manas)
>
>
>
> (2) For sAkShAtkAra, a sAkShI is required which will be the sAkShi of that
> sAkShAtkAra-vrittI. Hence, it is not possible in swarUpa.
>
>
>
> (3) SAkShAtkAra-vrittI, akhandAkAra-vrittI, AtmAkAra-vrittI are same. (He
> did not say this explicitly. It is inferred).
>
>
>
> (4) In GItA bhAShya, while explaining the AtmAkAra-vrittI, BhAShyakAra
> says - when manas is atyanta nirmala (actually two more conditions of
> atyanta svachcha and atyanta sUkShma are there), then owing to the
> commonness of the feature of atyanta-nirmalatva, AtmAkAra-vrittI is
> possible (even if Atman is nirAkAra).
>
>
>
> (5) Since Atman is not a viShaya - sAkShAtkAra-vrittI refers to a vritti
> which does refer to *any* viShaya.
>
>
>
>
>
> praNAms Sri Sudhanshu Shekhar prabhuji
>
> Hare Krishna
>
>
>
> Thanks for taking time to share.  With regard to No. 2, does it mean there
> is sAkshi which is witnessing the manas which has acquired sAkshAtkAra ??
> has he elaborated this point??  And No. 5, the last statement :
> “sAkShAtkAra-vrittI refers to a vritti which does refer to *any* viShaya”
> needs little more elaboration.
>
>
>
> Kindly  look into it in your leisure time.
>
>
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>
> bhaskar
>
>
>


-- 
Joint Commissioner of Income-tax,
Pune

sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com