[Advaita-l] [advaitin] SSSS on the controversy between mulav7idya and abhavarupa - directly and simply explained as per SSSS

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Bhaskar ji.


> Sri SSS’s take on vArtikakAra is very simple and straightforward.
>

And erroneous also, emanating out of non-appreciation of straight forward
meaning. VArtika says- अस्य द्वैतेन्द्रजालस्य यदुपादानकारणम्। अज्ञानं
तदुपाश्रित्य ब्रह्मकारणमुच्यते।। VArtika further says - उपादानं हि
बुद्ध्यादेरात्माविद्येति भण्यते। सकृद्विभातं चिन्मात्रं
ज्योतिरित्युपदिश्यते।। Whoever on earth translates/interprets that avidyA
is not upAdAna kAraNa is himself mistaken and also tries to confuse others.


> He observes in one of his works : the vArtikakAra has NOT accepted
> mUlAvidyA as advocated by the vivaraNakAra.
>

His observation is faulty owing to the promulgation of upAdAna-kAraNatva of
avidyA.


>  As per vArtika prakriya barring the three aspects of ajnAna for jnAna
> there is no other obstacle whatsoever.  AjnAna or jnAnAbhAva itself is the
> essence of the other two variants i.e. misconception and doubt.
>

UpAdAna-kAraNatva of avidyA is bAdhaka-sattva for abhAvatva of avidyA.


> So any number of vArtika quotes would simply cannot go against this final
> stand on avidyA by vArtikakAra.
>

This "final" stand on VArtika by SSS ji emanates out of fundamental
misunderstanding of bhAshya and VArtika.


> Sri Vittala shastri talks about these vArtika references and clarifies
> that these quotes would not help us to prove ‘fourth’ type of avidyA which
> is conspicuous by its absence in Tai. & bru vArtika and NS.  He further
> clarified that there is no profound and pronounced differences in vArtika-s
> when compared to mUla bhAshya.
>

Ab ye Vitthala ShAstri kaun hain? Unke kahne se kya ho jata hai?
"conspicuous by absence" in VArtika? See the following:

   1. आत्माज्ञानमतः प्रत्यक्चैतन्याभासवत्सदा। आत्मनः कारणत्वादेः
   प्रयोजकमिहेष्यते।।(BBV 4.3.355)
   2. तदात्मज्योतिषेद्धं सन्नित्यमेवावतिष्ठते। उत्पत्तिस्थितिभङ्गानां न
   वेद्मीति च साक्षित:।। (BBV 4.3.351)
   3. आत्माविद्यैव नः शक्तिः सर्वशक्यस्य सर्जने । नातोऽन्यथा शक्तिवादः
   प्रमाणेनावसीयते ।।
   4. अस्य द्वैतेन्द्रजालस्य यदुपादानकारणम्। अज्ञानं तदुपाश्रित्य
   ब्रह्मकारणमुच्यते।।  (BBV 1.4.371)
   5. अज्ञानमात्रोपाधित्वादविद्यामुषितात्मभिः।
   कौटस्थ्यान्निर्द्वयोऽप्यात्मा साक्षीत्यध्यस्यते जडै:।।  (BBV 1.4.372)
   6. अत्यन्ताननुभूतेषु हिमवत्पृष्ठवस्तुषु। जाग्रतोऽनुभवोऽप्येवं
   सुषुप्तान्न विशिष्यते।। (Sambandha BhAshya VArtika 995)
   7. सुषुप्त्याख्यं तमोऽज्ञानं बीजं स्वप्नप्रबोधयोः। स्वात्मबोधप्रदग्धं
   स्याद्बीजं दग्धं यथाऽभवम्।। (NS 4.43)
   8. बाह्यां वृत्तिमनुत्पाद्य व्यक्तिं स्यान्नाहमो यथा। नर्ते न्त:करणं
   तद्वद् ध्वान्तस्य व्यक्ति राञ्जसी।। (NS 4.58)
   9. योऽप्यविद्यादिसम्बन्ध: सोऽप्यविद्याप्रकल्पितः। वास्तवसत्वभिसम्बन्धो
   नोपपत्त्याऽऽत्मनो यतः।। (BBV 4.3.95)
   10. उपादानं हि बुद्ध्यादेरात्माविद्येति भण्यते। सकृद्विभातं चिन्मात्रं
   ज्योतिरित्युपदिश्यते।।
   11. अविद्यास्रोतसैवास्य क्रियाकारकताऽऽत्मन:। तत्स्थचैतन्यबिम्बेन
   भुङ्क्तेऽसौ कर्मणः फलम्।।
   12. जाग्रत स्वप्न सुषुप्तेषु त्वात्माविद्या मृषा सती। व्यवहारपथं
   प्राप्ता स्वतःसिद्धात्मसाक्षिका।।
   13. आत्माभासोऽपि योऽज्ञाने तत्कार्ये चावभासते।
   कार्यकारणतारूपस्तमप्येषोऽतिवर्तते।।
   14. बुध्यादिष्वपि सूक्ष्मेषु यत्सूक्ष्मतममुच्यते। बुध्यादिकारणं
   नित्यमात्माविद्येति भण्यते।। (348)
   15. चैतन्याभासावत्प्रत्यङ्मोहान्तात्प्रत्यगात्मनः। बुध्यादेर्विषयान्तस्य
   सिद्धि: स्यात्साक्षिणस्ततः।।(356)

vArtikakAra not only followed mUla bhAshya religiously but also added some
> yukti-s (logical devices) of bhAshyakAra to further strengthening them.
>

This you have stated right. But please forget about SSS' explanation which
not only violates BhAshya but also explicit words of vArtika. It is in
infact brazen to distort the clear words of VArtika. I mean, come on
Bhaskar ji. VArtika is saying avidyA is upAdAna kAraNa and you are saying -
no, it is not saying. Come on.


> There are some place there is a talk about upAdAnatva of avidyA etc. but
> it is not the subject matter of proving avidyA upAdAna kAranatva in that
> particular context, and here too avidyA is jnAnAbhAva only that leads to
> adhyAsa.
>

Utter hysterical blabbering.


>   So, Sri SSS’s followers may please be assured that unlike vyAkhyAna,
> vArtika followed mUla and elaborated whatever in mUla without introducing
> some extra alien concepts like bhAvarUpa, jadAtmaka, anirvachaneeya
> brahmAshrita, sadasatvilakshaNa  mUlAvidyA.
>

Bekaar ki baat. VArtika, BhAshya and anubhava all certify
bhAva-abhAva-vilakshaNA avidyA which is the material cause of anirvachanIya
prapancha.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.