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

[V Subrahmanian]

Dear All,

In the Adhyasa bhashya we have a definition:  smRti-rUpa paratra pUrvadRSTa
avabhAsaH. Here, the component rUpa is explained as 'sadRsa', smRti sadRsa,
that is, it is akin to smRti and not smRti itself.  In the same way, the
term bhAva rUpa means:  akin to bhAva and not bhAva itself.  That way,
avidyA will never qualify to be akin to Brahman which is the Absolute
Bhava.  Thus the objection to bhAva rUpa avidya is not at all justified.

warm regards
subbu

On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 8:18 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Raghav ji
>
> avidyA is bhAvarUpa while avidyAkArya and Brahman are bhAva ?
>>
>> Kindly clarify since the kArya is being clubbed with Brahman while kAraNa
>> is sadasadvilaxaNa?
>>
>
> Even the four abhAvAs are avidyA-kArya. So, avidyA-kArya are bhAva as well
> as abhAva. All vyAvhArika and prAtibhAsika vastu is bhAvAtmaka-avidyA-kArya
> and is within the ambit of "bhAva" in bhAva-abhAva-vilakshaNa. The four
> abhAva are abhAvAtnaka-avidyA-kArya and are within the ambit of "abhAva" in
> bhAva-abhAva-vilakshaNa.
>
> avidyA is not avidyA-kArya. It is the upAdAna thereof. Hence, it is
> different from both bhAva and abhAva.
>
> Further, Brahman is taken within the ambit of bhAva and asat, within the
> ambit of abhAva. This is not stated in so many words in Advaita Siddhi.
> There, it focuses on difference of avidyA from bhAvAtmaka-avidyA-kArya and
> abhAvAtnaka-avidyA-kArya and hence bhAva-abhAva-vilakshaNa. However, on
> closer scrutiny, as we have discussed earlier in this forum, we have found
> that asat is included within abhAva. And Brahman is the ultimate bhAva. So,
> it has to be within the ambit of bhAva.
>
> This is discussed in avidyA-lakshaNa-vichArah.
>
> Some excerpt:
> न च – अभावविलक्षणाविद्यादौ भावविलक्षणत्वमसम्भवि, परस्परविरोधादिति –
> वाच्यम् ; भावत्वाभावत्वयोर्बाधकसत्त्वेन तृतीयप्रकारत्वसिद्धौ
> परस्परविरहव्यापकत्वरूपविरोधासिद्धेः, परस्परविरहव्याप्यत्वरूपस्तु विरोधो
> नैकविरहेणापरमाक्षिपति ।
>
> Objection: BhAva and abhAva are mutually contradictory. They have
> mutual-virodha. Therefore, it is not possible that avidyA which is
> abhAva-vilakshaNa has also bhAva-vilakshaNatA.
>
> Answer: No. There is presence of bAdhaka in case avidyA is accepted as
> having either bhAvatva or abhAvatva.
>
> bAdhaka for bhAvatva: avidyA is stated by Shruti to be jnAna-nivartya and
> vinAshI. If it were to be bhAva, then anything which is bhAva and vinAshI
> has to have sAditva. [विनाशिभावः सादि:, घटवत्] However, Shruti says avidyA
> to be anAdi. Hence, the rule – that vinAshI bhAva is with beginning – is
> the bAdhaka for bhAvatva of avidyA.
>
> bAdhaka for abhAvatva of avidyA: avidyA is the upAdAna of the world.
> abhAva can never be upAdAna of anything. Hence, upAdAnatva is the bAdhaka
> for abhAvatva of avidyA.
>
> Therefore, avidyA is accepted to be bhAva-abhAva-vilakshaNA.
>
> Regards.
> Sudhanshu Shekhar.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "advaitin" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAH9%3D%2BBAa7ENzh%2BSHxLOTb2D6ob4b7%2BjUqe9zA7uocgCM8SmXwA%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAH9%3D%2BBAa7ENzh%2BSHxLOTb2D6ob4b7%2BjUqe9zA7uocgCM8SmXwA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>