[Advaita-l] Gaudapada and Shankara hold the waking objects to be mithya

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Venkat Ji,

I am just giving one reference which I could immediately  lay my hands on.

AdhyAsa Bhashya

//……तमेतमविद्याख्यमात्मानात्मनोरितरेतराध्यासं पुरस्कृत्य…..//

In a Foot Note in his (Sri SSS) translation, he mentions as follows on this

// Literal translation for अविद्याख्यम्  would be  **by the name of
avidyA**.  This leads to an alternate meaning for  आत्मानात्मनोरितरेतराध्यास
 to be अविद्या //.

Thus अविद्या  is accepted to mean adhyAsa here.  Thus no doubt avidyA is
jnAna abhAvah, but it is also understood  as adhyAsa. There are many such
references.  I have cited only one which I could readily recollect.
Regards

On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 5:21 PM Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:

> Namaste Chandramouliji
> However, avidyA is jnAna abhAvah according to SSS. If mithyAjnAna is the
> same as avidyA, then mithyAjnana is also jnAna abhAva. When jnAna
> originates, the abhAva of jnAna ceases to be. So mithyAjnAna should also
> cease to be.
>
> How can there be "a part" of jnAna abhAvah which remains when jnAna
> arrives?
>
> This must mean that mithyAjnAna is not jnAna abhAva or a part of it (for
> absence cannot have parts), but something else.
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>
> On Wed, 2 Aug 2023, 17:16 H S Chandramouli, <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Namaste.
>>
>> That is true. But even so avidyAlesha is the manifest part of avidyA and
>> hence considered separate from the destroyed avidyA. Sri SSS also makes a
>> similar  claim. This is evident from the second sentence onwards in the
>> translation by Gangoli.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 4:52 PM Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> But avidyAlesha is not avidyA in the traditional view, hence it can
>>> subsist even when avidyA is sublated.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Venkatraghavan
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 4:48 PM H S Chandramouli <
>>> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Namaste Venkat Ji,
>>>>
>>>> In continuation. There is no contradiction here. Just as in the case of
>>>> traditional view of avidyAlesha after destruction of avidyA.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>> Virus-free.www.avast.com
>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>> <#m_497647070307289308_m_-1536512947135242835_m_3419859106800396076_m_1570539728625929708_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 4:26 PM H S Chandramouli <
>>>> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Namaste Venkat Ji,
>>>>>
>>>>> Since the subsequent portion mentions
>>>>>
>>>>> // Mithyaa  jnaana …..which are falsified by virtue of jnaana (jnaana
>>>>> baadhita)…..//
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be quite in order to understand avidyA and mithyaa jnaana as
>>>>> meaning the same.
>>>>>
>>>>> You may like to refer to my response to Bhaskar Ji also.
>>>>> Regards
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 3:38 PM Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Namaste Chandramouliji,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I meant avidyAlesha. I added the quotes around avidyA because my
>>>>>> understanding was that the opponents to avidyAlesha were conflating
>>>>>> avidyAlesha with avidyA, leading them to object to the jnAni having any
>>>>>> avidyA remaining (in the form of avidyAlesha) post jnAna.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for posting the quote of Sri SSS. The first sentence of the
>>>>>> quote says "avidyA is completely negated (bAdhita)  by jnAna" but later he
>>>>>> says "There is no defect in admitting the subsistence of mithyajnAna  etc
>>>>>> for some time".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The only way I can reconcile the apparent contradiction between the
>>>>>> two is if the Swamiji differentiated avidyA from mithyAjnAna. So what
>>>>>> according to him is mithyAjnAna?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Venkatraghavan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Aug 2023, 14:21 H S Chandramouli, <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Namaste Venkat Ji,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Reg  //  It also means that there is an elegant answer to
>>>>>>> people objecting to the jnAni continuing to have "avidyA" //,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I presume you mean *avidyAlesha* by this. Curiously the strongest
>>>>>>> opponent, Sri SSS, himself admits of *avidyAlesha* for the jnAni for some
>>>>>>> time after jnAna. Only he (Sri SSS) means  *mithyAjnAnalesha*,  mithyAjnAna
>>>>>>>  understood as  abhAvarUpa avidyA (absence of knowledge). The irony of the
>>>>>>> whole situation did not strike me till now though I came across this
>>>>>>> position of Sri SSS some time back . I am quoting below from his text, in
>>>>>>> kannada, ShAnkara  VedAnta  Sara,  section 212, pages 279/280 (Translaion
>>>>>>> from kannada to English mine)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> //  Here the correct Sidhanta is – *avidyA is completely negated
>>>>>>> (bAdhita)  by jnAna, meaning thereby it leads to the conviction that it
>>>>>>> really does not exist at all ; just this and not that jnAna destroys avidyA
>>>>>>> in the same way as an axe cutting a tree or fire burning wood*.
>>>>>>> Hence it is but natural that even after negation, avidyA/kAma/karma as also
>>>>>>> their Ashraya namely the sharIra, which is caused by prarabdhakarma,
>>>>>>>  continue to function as usual;  just like the spinning  wheel once set in
>>>>>>> motion  by the potter continues to rotate till it loses its momentum.
>>>>>>> There is no defect in admitting the subsistence of mithyajnAna  etc for
>>>>>>> some time even after negation just as in the case of  the second
>>>>>>> moon/nachre-silver delusion/दिङ्ग्मोह(delusion concerning
>>>>>>> directions) etc. There is no harm caused to the कृतकृत्यता of a
>>>>>>> jnAni by the continuance of such negated entities (बाधितअनुवृत्ति)
>>>>>>> //.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The text by Sri SSS has also been translated to English along with
>>>>>>> commentary by DB Gangoli,  The Essential Adi Shankara.  See Section 212,
>>>>>>> pages 209/210.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Response of Sri SSS to some of your queries in your post are also
>>>>>>> covered in this section. They practically correspond, in my understanding,
>>>>>>> to the *traditional* views as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I thought it might be of interest.
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 1, 2023 at 9:27 PM Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
>>>>>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Namaste Bhaskar ji,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There are so many questions in your mail that it is quite
>>>>>>>> cumbersome to
>>>>>>>> reply to each one individually. So, I will only respond in a general
>>>>>>>> manner. I would request that if you have questions after reading
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> email, and you would like me to respond, please keep them to one or
>>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>>> important ones. Please don't mistake me, but I'm responding in the
>>>>>>>> middle
>>>>>>>> of a lot of pressing tasks and I want to ensure that I am using my
>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>> effectively.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But before that, I will ask you three questions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you agree that the appearance of the world continues for the
>>>>>>>> jnAni? Do
>>>>>>>> you agree he has a body after jnAna? Do you agree that a jnAni is
>>>>>>>> completely free of any bandha after jnAna?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To me, the answer is yes to all three questions. I don't know what
>>>>>>>> is/are
>>>>>>>> your answer(s) but would like to know - how you respond will inform
>>>>>>>> me what
>>>>>>>> you believe, because without understanding your position, I don't
>>>>>>>> know if
>>>>>>>> what I am stating is blindingly obvious or really necessary to make
>>>>>>>> myself
>>>>>>>> clear.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If your answer is yes, to all three questions, what is the cause
>>>>>>>> for the
>>>>>>>> continued appearance of the world? We have to say this is because
>>>>>>>> he has a
>>>>>>>> body mind complex until the end of his life. Despite this continued
>>>>>>>> world
>>>>>>>> appearance, because his avidyA is destroyed, the jnAni is a mukta.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Many AchAryas, including Shankaracharya, attribute many reasons for
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> presence of the body and continued world appearance post jnAna -
>>>>>>>> some say
>>>>>>>> prArabdha, some say avidyA samskAra, some say avidyAlesha, etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Now, your question is - what is this avidyAlesha? This also has many
>>>>>>>> answers given by the AchArya-s. Some say the samskAra itself is
>>>>>>>> avidyAlesha, some say it is a shakti-visheSha.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think we can say that prArabdha itself is the avidyAlesha (this
>>>>>>>> is my
>>>>>>>> view, I don't know if any AchArya holds this view or not) - ie if
>>>>>>>> we define
>>>>>>>> avidyAlesha as that which remains when avidyA is sublated by
>>>>>>>> samyakjnAna,
>>>>>>>> as prArabdha remains, it can be avidyAlesha.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We have to admit that prArabdha karma still continues after jnAna,
>>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>>> the presence of the body even after avidyA's destruction means that
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> appearance of the world continues for the jnAni. That being the
>>>>>>>> case what
>>>>>>>> is so wrong if we say prArabdha itself is the avidyAlesha?  As
>>>>>>>> prArabdha
>>>>>>>> karma is a product of avidyA, to name it as avidyAlesha is not
>>>>>>>> problematic.
>>>>>>>> Calling an effect by a name indicative of its cause is not unheard
>>>>>>>> of.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I believe such a postulate has the benefit of lAghavatva,
>>>>>>>> parsimoniousness,
>>>>>>>> because we don't have to postulate the continuance of prArabdha
>>>>>>>> karma and a
>>>>>>>> separate avidyAlesha. It also means that there is an elegant answer
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> people objecting to the jnAni continuing to have "avidyA". It would
>>>>>>>> be very
>>>>>>>> hard to dispute that the jnAni has a body or that it continues
>>>>>>>> because of
>>>>>>>> prArabdha which remains even when avidyA is destroyed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would be interested in hearing the specific flaws with such a
>>>>>>>> view.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Venkatraghavan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>>>>> Virus-free.www.avast.com
>>>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>>>>> <#m_497647070307289308_m_-1536512947135242835_m_3419859106800396076_m_1570539728625929708_m_-6611495724876522478_m_-1396459572777334919_m_-969472757914587743_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>