[Advaita-l] [advaitin] The nature of mUlAvidyA as per mUlAvidyAvAdins

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Jaishankar prabhuji
Hare Krishna

 (h) this avidyA does not mean it's an abhAva, nor agrahaNa nor 
 saMshaya nor it is saMskAra (impressions of saMskAra

 JN: This avidyA manifests itself as jnana-abhAvA, agrahana, 
 samshaya etc. So it can be called with all these names

>  As Sri SSS's clarifies most of these definitions of avidyA he has taken from the work called  panchapAdika vivaraNa ( the sub commentary written by prakAshAtmayati on paNchapAdika) published by Vijayanagaram Sanskrita Granthavali 1892),  So as per this work ( I don't have this original work) Sri Swamiji saying the avidyA advocated by vivaraNakAra is neither of these three forms of avidyA. When it is the avidyA as explained by bhAshyakAra like abhAva , agrahaNa and saMshaya and nothing else apart from this, why / what is the need for the one more avidyA which has the Ashraya in brahman  and which itself subsequently manifests again as jnAnAbhAva, agrahaNa and saMshaya.  If you are saying jnAnAbhAva is the subsequent development (appearance) of mUlAvidyA what would be the primary nature (mUla rUpa) of this avidyA??  What would be the difference between tUlA vidyA and mUlAvidyA and how these two get completely eradicated when later is an positive entity??  More of this later when time permits. Anyway the flexible version of avidyA that you are providing above if at all found in originals kindly provide it.  

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar