[Advaita-l] Binary nature of Jnana

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Ananda prabhuji
Hare Krishna

i have a follow up question here:
What is the difference between Pratibhandika and Viparitabhavana?	

>  Yes, it is not clear whether these pratibandhaka-s ( it is in plural must be somany) are something like nature of avidyA in the form of agrahaNa, anyathAgrahaNa, saMshaya or something like saMskAra rUpa avidyA lesha or strong praarabdha karma phala and how these pratibandhaka-s something stronger than aparOksha jnana and conceal the aparOksha jnana to illumine in its full glory.  And again doubt would arise how to differentiate between parOksha jnAni and aparOksha jnAni when pratibandhaka-s holding sway in aparOksha jnAni??  What would be the determining factor through which one can be labelled as aparOksha jnAni +  pratibandhaka-s OR parOksha jnAni + or - pratibandhakas!!??  

I request Sri Venkatraghavan prabhuji or Sri ChandramouLi prabhuji to educate us as per prakaraNa VS.  I posted my yesterday's below doubts also once again as I am not able to reconcile these things with clarity.  

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar

> praNAms Sri Venkatraghavan prabhuji / Sri ChandramouLi prabhuji Hare 
> Krisha I am really afraid I would be definitely missing something 
> substantial in understanding aparOksha jnana.  What is aparOksha jnana 
> or aparOksha anubhUti??  Is it not direct intuitive knowledge, the 
> highest knowledge or paramArtha jnAna ??  If this kind of jnana dawns 
> in mind where is the question of still existing some pratibandhaka-s??  
> If pratibandhaka-s, again I am not sure whether it is the nature of 
> avidyA or something else, still holding sway over paramArtha jnana or 
> aparOksha jnana then can we still call it paripUrNa jnana or 
> samshayAteeta jnana??  What is the one and only obstacle for the jeeva 
> to realize his paramArtha svarUpa??  Is it only avidyA or something 
> else apart from this also to be eradicated ??  I think bhAshyakAra 
> says avidyA is the ONLY hindrance the jnana is the only tool to efface 
> it.  And again what is the nature of avidyA/ajnAna/agrahaNa here??
> The answer is, not knowing that he is in svarUpa ekamedvAdviteeyaM 
> brahma, is it not??  And more importantly this not knowing nature of 
> jeeva
> (jnAnAbhAva) is ekarUpa ( avidyA ekarUpatvAt) so aparOksha jnana which 
> is again a manOvrutti ( Advaita jnAnam manOvrutti mAtraM) cannot 
> simultaneously accommodate the pratibandhaka type of avidyA in that 
> same place!!??  One is light and another is darkness we cannot have 
> both at the same place and at the same time.  If one after hearing 
> mahAvAkya and resultant janita aparOksha jnAna ( or shAstra vAkya 
> janita paramArtha
> jnana) how can partibandhaka-s still dictate terms??  When 
> pratibandhaka-s are there in a jnAni, how can we even assert that he 
> is an aparOksha jnAni??  The very act of jnana is not to remove these 
> obstacles (pratibandhaka-s)??  bhAshyakAra very clearly said in bruhad 
> bhAshya even an iota (vAlAgramAtramapi-visheshaNa used here) of 
> asarvAtma bhAva is there that state is considered as avidyAvasta.  
> Yattu sarvAtmabhAvAt arvAk vAlAgramAtramapi anyatvena drushyate nAhamasmeeti tadavasthA avidyA.
> Obviously we cannot have avidyAvastha and aparOksha jnana at the same 
> place.  So IMHO whether it is one time or several time, first time or 
> last time, continuous or intermittent that which pratyaya completely 
> eradicate the dosha of avidyA only that can be called vidyA nothing 
> else.  Ya eva avidyAdidOsha nivrutti phalakrut pratyayaH adyaH, antyaH 
> santataH asantatO v Asa eva vidyA clarifies bhAshyakAra.  So kindly 
> let me know how can I understand above statements with the light of above.