[Advaita-l] ***UNCHECKED*** Extremely powerful reasoning for 'Aham Brahmasmi' in the Bh.Gita

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Sudhaanshu Ji.

Reg  //  Therefore, AbhAsa is negated completely being mithyA though
bAdha-sAmanAdhikaraNya.

However, pratibimba is not negated completely being the bimba itself which
is Satya. Only the attribution of mithyA-anAtma-dharma-Aropa is negated.
Thus, in place of bAdha, we apply   //.

Negation through bAdha-sAmanAdhikaraNya or bhAga-tyAga-lakshaNA depends
upon the definition used for the entities being negated. However there is
no difference in the post-negation status. Both AbhAsa as well as
pratibimba stand negated. As I mentione earlier, bimba is the same in both
cases. Pratibimba corresponds to reflection of rose as rose in its
completeness while redness in the crystal is reflection of only an
attribute of the rose and not the entire rose itself.

Reg  //  Here lies the difference. Pratibimba is treated as Satya unlike
AbhAsa //.

Not exactly. There are two versions for pratibimba itself. One considers it
as real while the other one does not. Both are prevalent in different
commentaries.

Reg  //  Because of this difference, in AbhAsa-vAda, a confusion arises as
to how to avoid complete similarity of jIva (Kshetrajna) with kshetra //.

I have not come across any text where jIva is identified with kshetra.
Pratibimba or AbhAsa as identified with kshetra (BMI) is understood as jIva.

Reg  //  ChidAbhAsa is treated as Chetan (and yet mithyA) while entities
known by chidAbhAsa are jaDa //,

Entities known by pratibimba too are jaDa only. There is no difference on
that count as between pratibimba and AbhAsa.

Regards

On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 6:24 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste
>
> //Just an addition. Both pratibimba and AbhAsa are mithya only.
> Pratibimba needs a medium for reflection. The medium is mithya only. So is
> the pratibimba.//
>
> Here lies the difference. Pratibimba is treated as Satya unlike AbhAsa.
>
> Therefore, AbhAsa is negated completely being mithyA though
> bAdha-sAmanAdhikaraNya.
>
> However, pratibimba is not negated completely being the bimba itself which
> is Satya. Only the attribution of mithyA-anAtma-dharma-Aropa is negated.
> Thus, in place of bAdha, we apply bhAga-tyAga-lakshaNA.
>
> Because of this difference, in AbhAsa-vAda, a confusion arises as to how
> to avoid complete similarity of jIva (Kshetrajna) with kshetra.
>
> Here, in my understanding, the very differentiation of jaDa and Chetan is
> done on the basis of knowability-by-chidAbhAsa and not by mere knowabiltiy.
> ChidAbhAsa is treated as Chetan (and yet mithyA) while entities known by
> chidAbhAsa are jaDa.
>
> Regards.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>>>>
>>>>>