[Advaita-l] [advaitin] 'Adhyaropa apavada' found in Vivarana and other texts

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

> Namaste Sudhanshuji,
> //I ask you counter question. What is shakti? Define. Otherwise SSS’
> statement is meaningless that acceptance of avidyA as shakti is violative
> of adhyAropa-apavAda. Essentially, SSS did not understand what is meant by
> shakti.//
>
> Your denial of a positive bhavarupa avidya as opposed to Sankara's
> intended teaching of adhyasa avidya flies in the face of emic free
> panditry confirming SSSS's understanding by Hacker, Mayeda, Alson and
> Andrianic, in their exhaustive philological surveys of all the instances of
> avdya - alone or in compound - and of its presuppositions, implications and
> ramifications in the Brahma Sutras, Upadesa Sahasri, Naiskarmya Siddhi and
> Brhadaranyaka Upanishad, respectively. The unanimous consensus is that
> Sankara's use of avidya in all these texts was distorted by post Sankara
> Advaita in various ways!!  -- references available on demand
>
> Ignoring or side stepping these studies is disingenuous, imho. SSSS's
> corrective discoveries cannot be dismissed off handedly as some here have
> done. The serious investigation of his conclusions, if nothing else, is
> rich manana and because of their apta claim undermining the fundamental
> teaching of Adi Shanakara teaching, no student of Vedanta can stand firm in
> their conviction, it seems to me.
>

Very well Michael ji.

Now please define what is Shakti, which you proceeded to answer but went to
Hacker, Mayeda, Alston etc and God-knows-where who are liable to come
within the ambit of this statement of BhAshyakAra - तस्मात् असम्प्रदायवित्
सर्वशास्त्रविदपि मूर्खवदेव उपेक्षणीयः ॥

//References available on demand//

Sorry. No demand from my side.

//If nothing else, is rich manana//

No. It is not rich manana. The indulgence in replying to what is said in
their non-sAmpradAyik swa-kalpanA-prasUta-theories is only for the sake of
some sincere sAdhakAs like your goodself and some other aspirants.
Otherwise, personally, it is useless.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.