[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: pratiyogI-jnAna being mandatory for abhAva-jnAna

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Michael ji.

//thank you for your patience and continued engagement.//

It is a matter of joy to discuss these issues with sincere sAdhakAs like
yourself and others in this group.

//who is this person who is guilty of mistake? Aren't you putting the cart
before the horse? Asmat confused with yusmad includes pramatr. Such being
the case bAdha of any empirical superimposition does not apply hence no
pratiyogin.//

When you confused rope for a snake - you had a knowledge - "there is a
dangerous snake there". The object of your knowledge - the content of your
knowledge - was not rope. The object of your knowledge was snake.

Now this snake was not a real snake made with biological parts. Was it?
Obviously not. It was an illusory snake. [This illusory snake had a
snake-hood which was basically vyAvahArika-snakehood-tAdAtmya.]

Further, this illusory snake, which is the object of your knowledge, did
not exist. Nonetheless, it appeared to exist. It appeared to exist and was
about to bite you, so you ran.

And then you realised - it is not a snake, it is a rope. So, the object of
your knowledge changed from a snake to a rope. And you say -- there has
never been a snake here. There was just an appearance of snake. The snake
-- which was the object of my knowledge -- was non-existent and yet, it
appeared. All that was there, was a rope.

This is all which I am saying. There was an appearance of a non-existent
snake. This is what is called a prAtibhAsika-snake. A non-existent
appearance. This "appearance" is also called sattvena-prateeti or
sat-tAdAtmya. It appears to exist.

Where is putting the cart before the horse? I am merely explaining our
experience.

//Asmat confused with yusmad includes pramatr. Such being the case bAdha of
any empirical superimposition does not apply hence no pratiyogin.//

Please explain what exactly you wish to convey here.

//we need to recognize that both non-existents are only thought concepts
AND there are no distinctions within non-existence. Please, we have
scrubbed this issue threadbare several times. Without a new fiber of
argument, best to let it dissolve methinks.//

This is the view of MAdhvAs, the dualists, that there are no distinctions
between non-appearing non-existent (tuchchha) and appearing non-existent
(mithyA). They consider both as asat. This is contradicted by anubhava and
also by reason. BhAshya also equates world with illusory snake, magically
created elephant, dream-objects. However, BhAshya never equates world with
horns of hare. BhAshya itself distinguishes illusory objects from horns of
hare.

Entire world is mithyA. It is non-existent. Otherwise, there would be a
charge of duality. And yet, it appears. That is the magic. That is mAyA.
Appearing while it is not. And on the basis of this appearance, this is
differentiated from horns of hare.

//"Advaita says"? Not Sankara bhasya, if I am not mistaken.//


Of course you are mistaken.🙂  It is the crystalised view of Shankara.

//How might there exist avachchhinna or modificiation in Chaitanya?//

Avachchhinna does not mean modification in chaitanya. Take for example a
pot. It gives rise to the usage "pot-space". This pot-space does not lead
to modifciation in space, but ghaTa-avachchhinna-AkAsha becomes available
for transaction. Similarly, for chaitanya.

 //Are you referring to Ghata Bhasya in Brh. Up. ?//

Yes.

//Please spell out more specifically with examples of what you mean by
bhava-abhava vilakshana.//

The term used for avidyA is bhAvarUpa. It is explained that bhAvarUpa word
is used to signify its abhAva-vilakshaNatA. One should not infer that
bhAvarUpa means bhAva. So, all those who translate bhAvarUpa as "positive"
are not correct. Please note.

bhAvarUpa means bhAva-abhAva-vilakshaNa.

Now, what are the items within the ambit of abhAva --- asat, prAk-abhAva,
pradhvamsa-abhAva, anyonya-abhAva and atyanta-abhAva

What are the items within the ambit of bhAva -- Brahman, all avidyA-kArya
(such as pot, cloth, this world, illusory snake etc. Both prAtibhAsika and
vyavahArika avidyA-kArya).

avidyA is different from both.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.