[Advaita-l] DSV of Sri Madhusudana Saraswati

[H S Chandramouli]

Raghav Ji,

Namaste.

Reg  << 1. Silver is first seen. Later verified to be nacre. After this you
only
see nacre. You can't see silver again even though the thing seen is bright
and shines like silver >>,

Not necessarily. The perceiver many times can still feel that what he is
perceiving looks like silver only and not nacre, but this time around he is
sure it is nacre only, because silver was bAdhita. This type of continuance
in perception of error is more evident perhaps in the illustration of
rope-serpent.

Reg  << My understanding is that only if perspective  2 is regarded as a
possibility, then we have to include abAdhitatvaM as a necessary criterion
for deciding whether a given cognition is pramA  >>

That is right. But it applies to perspective 1 also as explained above. The
explanation no doubt makes 1 and 2 identical.

Reg << Even the word prAtibhAsika is, as I understand, applied to the
experiences
under perspective 2. That is, there is a certain continuation of the
earlier appearance. Like the sun rising etc >>,

Not “Even”. Perspective 2 indeed is considered prAtibhAsika only. However
sun rising etc is sOpAdhika bhrAnti and not considered prAtibhAsika as per
VP. It is vyAvahArika.
Regards

On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 8:31 PM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Chandramouli ji
> There are two perspectives
>
> 1. Silver is first seen. Later verified to be nacre. After this you only
> see nacre. You can't see silver again even though the thing seen is bright
> and shines like silver.
>
> 2. Silver is first seen. Later verified to be nacre. Still, the appearance
> of silver continues. This appearance-of-silver cognition is no doubt
> experienced, but not regarded as pramA since abAdhitatvam criterion is not
> satisfied.
>
> My understanding is that only if perspective  2 is regarded as a
> possibility, then we have to include abAdhitatvaM as a necessary criterion
> for deciding whether a given cognition is pramA.
>
> Even the word prAtibhAsika is, as I understand, applied to the experiences
> under perspective 2. That is, there is a certain continuation of the
> earlier appearance. Like the sun rising etc.
>
> Is that what you wete referring to in saying the "wrong perception"
> continues not withstanding sublation.
>
> Om
> Raghav
>
>
>
>
>