[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: Does the mukta/jnani see the world?

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Bhaskar ji.

I will answer all your questions. First you explain what is the difference
between vijnAnavAda and drishTi-srishTi-vAda.

//If you want to argue that what is being refuted here is ‘entirely’
different from your superior DSV module you have to be clear in your
assertion before giving higher rank to DSV and contrasting the same from
vijnAnavAda, is it not!!??  I doubt I have seen anything of this order in
your mails,  OTOH elsewhere in one of your statements, you said ( I may be
wrong) in this particular issue (mind is all)  shankara is in agreement
with vijnAnavAdins//

Sir, there are agreements between SDV and DSV also. So? Does it mean that
DSV and SDV are same? VijnAnavAda has got nothing to do with VedAnta or
DSV. In some respect, there may be identity of conclusion in both. That
does not prove that they are same.

 //If the heart and soul of vedAnta is mere DSV and SDV is inferior to DSV
not fit for mOksha, again you have to prove DSV is entirely different from
Advaita pUrvapaxi vijnAnavAdi who endorses the view upalabdhi itself
Vishaya (both jnana and Artha) and this upalabdhi itself comes and goes
(kshaNika) etc.  Till that time you don’t have any valid point to defend
your stand as shrutyanugraheeta tarka/yukti.//

You learn about the difference of DSV and vijnAvAda from texts if you feel
like. If you think they are same, carry on with the idea.


//with the same logical inference why don’t I say even dream world also as
real as waking world and both are capable of giving me mOksha and right
place of doing sAdhana!!  Why on the earth I should ignore and tag it as
illusory instead using the same logic I can treat both states are  as
reality only.//

Sir ji. The illusoriness of dream is well-accepted to both parties. Hence,
it is eligible to become an example in logic to deduce inference. The
reality of waking world is not acceptable to both parties. Hence, you
cannot take that as an example. This is Logic101.

//Anyway in kArika itself kArikAgaara agreed that the worlds of Vishwa,
taijasa and prAjna’s world are real!! //

News!!

//And again, to assert and prove the oneness of Atman why should I reject
the existence of world ( for which Ishwara is abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa)
as non existent for me it is clear sign of immaturity and illogical coz.//

Your dream world was created by abhinna-nimitta-upadan-kAraNa Ishwara? Test
your conclusion on the litmus test of identity of waking and dream.

//Knowingly or unknowingly you are attributing some existence to
‘something’ apart from Atman and asking us to negate it as illusory.//

There is no existence to anything except Atman. Illusion ka definition hi
hai -- traikAlika-nishedha-pratiyogitvam.

//Oneness is not at the cost of duality but it is the very essence of
duality, the jnAni-s realization is I am myself in many forms but they are
not in me (see Lord’s declaration in geeta) and  is the bhUma drushti or
Samyak drushti of jnAni-s as well and please note they are not the poor
students in the module of SDV as you reckon.  Even an idiot (dehAtmavAna)
does feel his ‘oneness’ despite the existence of his different body
parts!!  You should first realize in shankara’s Advaita vedAnta :
perception of dvaita is not opposed to Advaita jnana, coz. Of the simple
fact dvaita perception is pratyaksha pramANita and Advaita darshana is
shAstra pramANita and shAstra janita vyavahAra bAdhita jnana and NOT
vyavahAra abhAva jnana both pramANa-s are not mutually contradicting and
advocating what is valid in its own sphere of pramANa.//

Pehle aap ye prove kijiye ki you are not in a dream, then we can see what
Gita says and what shAstra says. Your reliance on Shruti and Gita is same
as your reliance on dream-Shruti and dream-Gita.

//Anway, all these things said umpteen times just to hear the concluding
illogical statements like : ‘to be ignored or just stepping stone and good
only in some initial stages / module etc.’’.//

You try your level best to distinguish dream and waking. If you cannot
distinguish, then appreciate the implication of their identity.