[Advaita-l] Paul Hacker on Avidya in Brahma Sutras

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Hari Om V Subramanian ji,

I earlier used to follow this line of understanding wherein avidya was
termed as jnAna-abhAva. But AchArya in BU 1.4.10 states unambiguously --

न च घटाभावः सन्पटः अभावात्मकः ; किं तर्हि ? भावरूप एव । एवं घटस्य
प्राक्प्रध्वंसात्यन्ताभावानामपि घटादन्यत्वं स्यात् , घटेन
व्यपदिश्यमानत्वात् , घटस्येतरेतराभाववत् ; *तथैव* *भावात्मकताभावानाम्* ।

Any unbiased person reading this will conclude that jnAna-abhAva is also
bhAvarUpa.

Regards,
Sudhanshu Shekhar.

On Thu, 19 May, 2022, 12:06 pm V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l, <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> The following is what SSS says in the ‘Reply’:
>
> // *AdhyAsa*, of course, presupposes ignorance or want of true knowledge.
> But this is a logical presupposition, a necessary implication of thought.
> No positive entity like the unfortunate *MUlAvidyA* can claim precedence in
> time over *adhyAsa; *for, as already said, time itself is its product.
> Vedanta which predicates the unity of Brahman will be shattered to pieces,
> if a second entity not subjected to or originating from *adhyAsa* be for a
> moment conceded to exist. The reality of the not-self (*anAtman) *follows
> necessarily from its not being *adhyAsa, *superimposed. I submit this vital
> aspect of the system to the learned Professor for his deep consideration.//
>
> From the above it is clear that SSS admits of an ignorance presupposing
> adhyAsa. It is also clear, from the concluding remarks above, that SSS has,
> erroneously, equated the bhAvarUpa status of mUlAvidyA with the Reality of
> Brahman. He says that accepting a condition of ignorance prior to
> superimposition is *a logical presupposition, a necessary implication of
> thought. *What prevents him from extending this privilege of logical
> necessity to the Acharyas who have found it necessary to posit a condition
> preceding adhyAsa and naming it ‘mUlAvidyA’? It would be pertinent to
> examine how and in what ways is the *‘want of knowledge’ or ‘jnAna
> abhAva’* as
> his followers term it, is different in kind from the mUlAvidyA that SSS
> opposes vehemently.
>
>
> regards
>
> subbu
>
> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 11:43 AM Venkatesh Murthy via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Namaste
> >
> > There are two objections raised by SSS and others not accepting Mula
> > Avidya.
> >
> > One- There is no cause for Adhyasa and it is the same as Avidya.
> >
> > Two, Avidya is not Bhava Rupa.
> >
>
> Sri SSS
>
> >
> > Both objections are baseless. Mula Avidya Vadins are in agreement with
> > Sankara Bhashya. Bhava Rupa means only Vyavaharika.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 11:13 AM Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Namaste Praveen ji,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the interesting parallel with the vyAkaraNa sUtra and the
> > > reference from Ratnaprabha. There are many interpretations indeed of
> the
> > > tametam evamlakshaNam sentence - none of which consider mUlAvidyA to be
> > > synonymous with adhyAsa.
> > >
> > > Re the contention that bhAvarUpatva of avidyA is a post Shankara
> > construct,
> > > there is a very interesting passage in the bRhadAraNyaka bhAShya to the
> > > mantra 4.3.20 where the bhAvrUpatva of avidyA is indicated:
> > >
> > > तथा अविद्यायामप्युत्कृष्यमाणायाम् , तिरोधीयमानायां च विद्यायाम् ,
> > > अविद्यायाः फलं प्रत्यक्षत एवोपलभ्यते — ‘अथ यत्रैनं घ्नन्तीव जिनन्तीव’
> > इति ।
> > > When ignorance increases and knowledge is suppressed, the results of
> > > ignorance are directly perceived i.e. - "now, if he feels like he was
> as
> > > though being killed, or as though being overpowered".
> > >
> > > Talk of the increase or decrease of something can only apply if the
> thing
> > > increasing or decreasing is of the nature of being transactionally
> > > existent. If it is transactionally non-existent, no degrees of increase
> > or
> > > decrease are tenable. It is binary - if knowledge is present,
> ignorance,
> > of
> > > the nature of the abence of knowledge, is absent and vice versa.
> > >
> > > Later on, adhyAsa as a product of avidyA  is being talked about:
> > >
> > > अत इदम् अविद्यायाः सतत्त्वमुक्तं भवति — सर्वात्मानं सन्तम्
> असर्वात्मत्वेन
> > > ग्राहयति, आत्मनः अन्यत् वस्त्वन्तरम् अविद्यमानं प्रत्युपस्थापयति,
> > आत्मानम्
> > > असर्वमापादयति ; ततस्तद्विषयः कामो भवति ; यतो भिद्यते कामतः,
> > > क्रियामुपादत्ते, ततः फलम् — तदेतदुक्तम् । वक्ष्यमाणं च ‘यत्र हि
> द्वैतमिव
> > > भवति तदितर इतरं पश्यति’ (बृ. उ. २ । ४ । १४), (बृ. उ. ४ । ५ । १५)
> इत्यादि
> > ।
> > > इदम् अविद्यायाः सतत्त्वं सह कार्येण प्रदर्शितम् ; विद्यायाश्च कार्यं
> > > सर्वात्मभावः प्रदर्शितः अविद्याया विपर्ययेण ।
> > >
> > > In discussing the nature of avidyA, Shankaracharya says that it is that
> > > which causes the self which is the all, to appear limited
> (असर्वात्मत्वेन
> > > *ग्राहयति*), causes things other than the self, which are not really
> > > present, to appear (अन्यत् वस्त्वन्तरम् अविद्यमानं *प्रत्युपस्थापयति*),
> > > superimposed finitude upon the self (आत्मानम् *असर्वमापादयति*). The
> > > causative verbs used in connection with avidyA is indicative of it
> being
> > > bhAvarUpa - for, how can the absence of things lead to a positive
> > outcome?
> > >
> > > That such an adhyAsa is the product of avidyA is also mentioned above
> > इदम्
> > > अविद्यायाः सतत्त्वं *सह कार्येण *प्रदर्शितम् ;
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Venkatraghavan
> > >
> > > On Wed, 18 May 2022, 15:12 Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l, <
> > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Namaste Venkat ji,
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 7:13 PM Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> > > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > It appears that Hacker's conclusion that avidyA is the same as
> > adhyAsa
> > > > > rests on the bhAShya sentence "tametam evamlakshaNam adhyAsam
> paNDitA
> > > > > adhyAseti manyante". He concludes from this that according to
> > Shankara,
> > > > > avidyA is the same as adhyAsa, which differentiates him from later
> > > > > advaitins.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > True. Hacker's taking avidyA as adhyAsa literally seems to be the
> > > starting
> > > > point for all errors and this very topic has been discussed multiple
> > > times
> > > > on this list. Looks like it is a never-ending issue. I'd also like to
> > > > revisit the same and add a couple of points. A simple way to look at
> > > > bhAShya statement tam etam evam lakShaNam adhyAsam paNDitAH avidyA
> iti
> > > > manyante/ तमेतमेवंलक्षणमध्यासं पण्डिता अविद्येति मन्यन्ते is to say
> > that
> > > he
> > > > is quoting someone that he doesn't completely agree. On the vyAkaraNa
> > > > sUtra, lopaH shAkalyasya, it is said that Panini doesn't agree with
> > lopaH
> > > > as he states that it is the opinion of Shakalya, but he respects it,
> > > making
> > > > it an optional lopaH. Similarly here, Panditas consider adhyAsa as
> > > avidyA,
> > > > but Bhagavan Bhashyakara doesn't necessarily agree. The other answer
> > > would
> > > > be as seen in the Bhashyaratnaprabha on it which raises a pUrvapakSha
> > so:
> > > > tathApi kAraNAvidyAM tyaktvA kAryAvidyA kimiti varNyate tatrAha --
> > > tatreti.
> > > > tasmin adhyAse ukta nyAyena, avidyAtmake sati ityarthaH/
> > > >
> > > > तथापि कारणाविद्यां त्यक्त्वा कार्याविद्या किमिति वर्ण्यते तत्राह -
> > > >
> > > > तत्रेति ।
> > > >
> > > > तस्मिन्नध्यासे उक्तन्यायेनाविद्यात्मके सतीत्यर्थः । मूलाविद्यायाः
> > > > सषुप्तावनर्थत्वादर्शनात्कार्यात्मना तस्या अनर्थत्वज्ञापनार्थं
> > > तद्वर्णनमिति
> > > > भावः । The reason that the mUlAvidyA/ kAraNavidyA is not described
> but
> > > the
> > > > kAryAvidyA is because its adversities are unknown during deep sleep.
> > > Since
> > > > the adversities of the resultant avidyA. adhyAsa are easily known,
> the
> > > same
> > > > is made known of its causal avidyA.
> > > >
> > > > On a related note, the endless complaints repeating differences of
> > > > mithyA +jnAna and mithyA + ajnAna compound split by Hacker and his
> > > > followers is laughable. The reason is that both jnAna and ajnAna are
> > > mithyA
> > > > in the sampradAya. The objection against sub-commentators that they
> tag
> > > > avidyA as bhAvarUpa is flawed too, as by disagreeing to mithyAjnAna
> as
> > > > mithyA+ajnAna, ajnAna would become non-mithyA and thereby bhAvarUpa
> > > (their
> > > > misunderstanding of whatever bhAvarUpa is) for the opponents
> > themselves!
> > > > The same is not a flaw when sampradAya states that ajnAna is mithyA
> > > because
> > > > bhAvarUpa doesn't mean sadrUpa but means it is not asadrUpa = yat
> > kinchit
> > > > bhAvarUpa.
> > > >
> > > > 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] */
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> > > >
> > > > For assistance, contact:
> > > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> > >
> > > For assistance, contact:
> > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards
> >
> > -Venkatesh
> > _______________________________________________
> > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> >
> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> >
> > For assistance, contact:
> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>