[Advaita-l] ***UNCHECKED*** Re: [advaitin] rope has some problem in rope snake analogy :-)

[Raghav Kumar Dwivedula]

Kindly read unconstitutional as "unconditional" in my last message.

Om


On Thu, 28 Dec, 2023, 6:42 pm Raghav Kumar Dwivedula, <
raghavkumar00 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Namaste Venkataraghavan ji
>
> Can there be example of jnAnAdhyAsa without arthAdhyAsa? Can we say a
> visual or auditory hallucination (of the type that's unconstitutional as in
> schizophrenia a la "The Beautiful Mind" for example)?
>
> Om
>
>
>
>
>>
>> I had meant buddhau in the sense of the adhyAsa being exclusively located
>> in the mind, ie jnAna adhyAsa, with no corresponding artha adhyAsa, which
>> I
>> took to be the meaning ascribed to the phrase buddhiparikalpita by Sri
>> Bhaskar ji.
>>
>> If you recall, I had mentioned that in artha adhyAsa, the superimposition
>> of the snake takes place at the location of the rope, rather than it
>> purely
>> located in the mind. To which, Sri Bhaskar had cited this bhAShya to say
>> that the snake is only located in the mind. He had said and I quote:
>>
>> "The rajju-sarpa example has been given to drive home the point that there
>> is no sarpa in rajju and sarpaavayava are mere imagination."
>>
>> I had offered an alternative explanation for the phrase - whether you
>> agree
>> with that explanation or not, the more important question is whether you
>> agree with Bhaskar ji with respect to this bhAshya being evidence of the
>> rope snake being purely located in the mind ie refuting anirvachanIya
>> khyAti or, alternatively, whether you accept that an anirvachanIya snake
>> is
>> created in the location of the snake at the time of adhyAsa.
>>
>> In fact, deep rooted conviction *in* the mind, buddhau parikalpitena,
>> >  would be more appropriate in the current context, it being svAbhAvika,
>> > naisargika.
>> >
>> Maybe, but my point is that this bhAShya is not a proof of the
>> untenability
>> of anirvachanIya khyAti - ie the creation of an anirvachanIya snake at the
>> location of the rope (arthAdhyAsa) and the creation of a corresponding
>> cognition of the snake in the mind (jnAnAdhyAsa). There are several
>> possible interpretations of the phrase buddhiparikalpita that are possible
>> and to reduce it to merely one and use it as evidence against
>> anirvachanIya
>> khyAti is untenable in my opinion.
>>
>>
>> Reg  // That is why Shankaracharya mentions the mRtghaTa and the
>> rajjusarpa
>> > examples in the same sentence (because there is something additional he
>> > wishes to convey with the second example) //,
>> >
>> > Notice the use of the word आदि(Adi)(etcetera) in  रज्ज्वादि
>> सर्पाद्याकारेण
>> > in respect of vivarta vikAra as against मृद्घटाद्याकारेण in respect of
>> > pariNAma vikAra. It is used in respect of both रज्जु (rajju) and
>> सर्प(sarpa)
>> > in one while it is used only in respect of घट(ghata) but not in respect
>> > of मृत् (mRRit) in the other.  Multiplicity is seen simultaneously in
>> the
>> > case of  mRtghaTAdi (such as pot, lump etc), and hence difference
>> between
>> > them can be  perceived by the mind. But multiplicity is not seen
>> > simulataneously if only the standard rajjusarpa illustration is
>> considered
>> > for vivarta vikAra even if आदि(Adi)(etcetera) word is used in respect of
>> > sarpa. Rope is perceived either as snake or as garland or as stick or as
>> > crack in the wall, only one at a time. Difference cannot be perceived.
>> > Hence रज्ज्वादि  in रज्ज्वादि सर्पाद्याकारेण  is intended to be the
>> > equivalent for घटादि of मृद्घटाद्याकारेण. रज्ज्वादि represents all
>> > objects simultaneously perceived at any given time, all of which are
>> > vivarta vikAra. सर्पाद्याकारेण is to convey vivarta vikAra. They are all
>> > conceived as different from each other by the mind though in reality
>> they
>> > are all सत्(sat) only. That in my understanding is what Sri Bhagavatpada
>> > intends to convey by mentioning  the mRtghaTa and the rajjusarpa
>> examples
>> > in the same sentence.
>> >
>>
>> I have a different understanding to the above to what you have provided,
>> but that is not relevant to the point under discussion, so will not go
>> into
>> the reasons for that now.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Venkatraghavan
>>
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>