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

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Venkatraghavan prabhuji
Hare Krishna

"The frame of reference for this adhyAsa is the day to day transactional world (lOkavyavahAra) and mithyAjnAna in this context is knowledge that is unreal or false knowledge mithyAbhUtaM tat jnAnam Sri SSS clarifies in one of his works).  So with this backdrop mithyAjnana nimittaH simply means caused by misconception, as said, mistaking one thing for another owning to the non-discrimination between the satya and anruta which is again all too natural."

I think the above directly attempts to answer the question, what does mithyAjnAna nimittah mean?


Ø     As I said, I referred his Kannada version and it may not be the accurate translation of his observations in English due to my language limitation.  But I am sure it almost matches 90% if not cent percept 😊  And I hope you would be in a better position to explain his perspective after studying his original works in Sanskrit and English.

But I think such an explanation is tautological - i.e. viShaya-viShayiNor-itaretara bhAvah...mithyAjnAna-nimittah -  this phrase would mean: the subject being mistaken for the object and vice versa, is caused by mistaking one for another. One need not say the reason A exists is because of A - that is not saying anything at all.


Ø     Tautological??  In what sense, if I am right Sri SSS talks about adhyAsa in buddhi not about external object.  jnAnAdhyAsa not arthAdhyAsa.  Hence he says shankara talking about reality transfer at buddhi level only atasmin tad ‘buddhiH’. So, seeing the sarpa (or adhyArOpita object) is gauNa mithyAjnAna (misconception about rope) of the rope in the antaHkaraNa is mukhya.  As you know how this is explained in br. Bh. ( Sri SSS does not quote this bhAshya, just I am remembering it) how in shukti rajata example there is shukti only and rajata is ‘shabda’ mAtra.  Moreover the reason to establish the existence of  A (adhyAsa)  is not at all necessary (pramANa is not required) as per Sri SSS when it is anubhava siddha.  avichArita / unlearnt siddhAnubhava.  Moreover adhyAsa, adhyArOpa, adhyArOpita are not in the order/sequence of  kAraNa-kArya to say adhyAsa A (antaHkaraNa dOsha) resulting in AdhyAsa A (seeing the sarpa).  In short lokavyavahARa is due to avichArita siddha adhyAsa in the buddhi.  And this adhyAsa is not something that is created at some point of time and it does not demand any kAraNa since it is explained as anAdi, naisargika, svAbhAvika etc. In tishtan gAyan example (jnana – mOksha example which bhAshyakAra gives) two are not separate events likewise when we say there is flowing river, see there is standing hill etc. these examples do not convey these are separate sequential order ( like once upon a time hill was sitting and now that is standing etc.)  likewise, adhyAsa, adhyArOpa, adhyArOpita etc. are not sequential events to see the tautology.  Atleast this is what I have understood from this Kannada work.  There is elaborated discussion about it in this work and Sri SSS here explains who vyAkhyAna like bhAmati and vivaraNa took some ‘extra efforts’ to explain this to suit the mUlAvidyavAda.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar