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

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Sudhanshu ji,

Thank you for sharing the portions of the Naishkarmya Siddhi in this
regard. In fact, there is so much consonance between this and the mANDUkya
kArikA bhAShya portions that I shared, it is almost as if SureshvarAchArya
was providing a sub-commentary to the kArikA bhAShya here.

Coming to the specific defense provided by Sri SSS to this, that ignorance
must be present in deep sleep is made from the standpoint of the waking
state - why that statement alone, every statement can only made from the
standpoint of the waker. Only the waker can say ignorance is present in
deep sleep. There is no waker in deep sleep to make such a statement, and
the sleeper cannot make any statement.

Also, according to Sri SSS, ignorance is jnAna abhAva. There is no jnAna in
suShupti, ie deep sleep has jnAna abhAva. So even for Sri SSS, such an
ignorance is certainly present in deep sleep.

Sri SSS could have simply said - "by such a statement in the NS,
Sureshvaracharya was saying there is the "absence of jnAna" kind of
ignorance in deep sleep". The fact that Sri SSS did not do that - but chose
to go with the roundabout and frankly inexplicable explanation that the
statement was made from the standpoint of the waker - implies that in his
heart of hearts, he knew that Shankaracharya and Sureshvaracharya were
referring to a bhAvarUpa ignorance only - at least in the waking and dream
states.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan


On Sat, Aug 24, 2024 at 9:57 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Venkat ji.
>
> There is explicit mention and argument by VArtikakAra in Naishakarmya
> Siddhi 3.58 where he proves that sushupti has ajnAna.
>
> सर्वानर्थबीजस्यात्मानवबोधस्य सुषुप्ते संभवात् । यदि हि सुषुप्तेऽज्ञानं
> नाभविष्यदन्तरेणापि वेदान्तवाक्यश्रवणमनन
> निदिध्यासनान्यहब्रह्मास्मीत्यध्यवसायात्सर्वप्राण भूतामपि स्वरसत एव
> सुषुप्तप्रतिपत्तेः सकलसंसारो च्च्हित्तिप्रसङ्गः । न च कैवल्यात्पुनरुत्थानं
> न्याय्यमनिर्मोक्षप्रसङ्गात् । न चान्य एव सुषुप्तोऽन्य एवोत्थित इति शक्यं
> वक्तुं नाद्राक्षमहं सुषुप्तेऽन्यत्किं चिदपीत्युत्तितस्य
> प्रत्यभिज्ञादर्शनात् ।
>
> #तस्मादवश्यं #सुषुप्तेऽज्ञानमभ्युपगन्तव्यम् ।
>
> ननु यदि तत्राज्ञानमभविष्यद्रागद्वेषघटाज्ञानादिवत्प्रत्यक्षमभविष्यद्यथेह
> लोके घटं न जानामीत्यज्ञानमव्यवहितं प्रत्यक्षम् । अत्रोच्यते । न ।
> अभिव्यञ्जकाभावात् । कथमभिव्यञ्जकाभाव इति चेच्च्हृणु ।
>
> बाह्यां वृत्तिमनुत्पाद्य व्यक्तिः स्यान्नाहमो यथा ।
> नर्तेऽन्तःकरणं तद्वद्ध्वान्तस्य व्यक्तिराञ्जसी ॥ ५८॥
>
> SSS' hold that sushupti has no ajnAna.
>
> When faced with direct statement by VArtikakAra in NS 3.58 that ajnAna in
> sushupti must be accepted and also MANDUkya 1.2 and 1.11 - they say that
> ajnAna in deep sleep is accepted from the point of view of waker. But from
> sushupti's own point of view, the ajnAna is not admitted (whatever that may
> mean!).
>
> Again they would say that this bIja is jnAna-abhAva and its burning etc is
> metaphorical. The bondage of prAjna by tattva-agrahaNa is stated to be from
> the point of view of waker and from prAjna's own standpoint (again,
> whatever that may mean!), there is no bondage.
>
> They say that in sushupti, there is no ajnAna, and they would quote
> BrihadAraNyaka 4.3.23 (which refers to absence of vyaktA-avidyA in sushupti
> and not avidyA per se) for this purpose. The objection and rebuttal by
> BhAshyakAra in MK 1.2 and 1.11 would be somehow explained away by them as
> being discussed from the point of view of waker.
>
> Regards.
>
>> --
> 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%2BBAGDWEqXWZKxTqDY%2B%3D3g8j5wPHNMLWpOVXoaBFqPzS_Zg%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAH9%3D%2BBAGDWEqXWZKxTqDY%2B%3D3g8j5wPHNMLWpOVXoaBFqPzS_Zg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>