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

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Chandramouliji,

How else would your translate his words - तस्मान्मिथ्याज्ञानव्यतिरेकेण
नाज्ञानं नाम वस्त्वस्ति?

Regards,
Venkatraghavan


On Mon, 26 Aug 2024, 20:10 H S Chandramouli, <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Venkat Ji,
>
> Reg  // However, the crucial point is none of the verses that Sri SSS
> quotes, lead us to the conclusion that there is no entity called ajnAna
> other than mithyAjnAna (adhyAsa), as alleged by Sri SSS //,
>
> I don’t think that is his conclusion. Yes. He does not admit ajnAna as an
> **entity**. On the other hand, he is saying that mithyAjnAna (wrong
> knowledge or adhyAsa) and ajnAna (absence of knowledge) are both present.
> mithyAjnAna (wrong knowledge or adhyAsa) is the result of ajnAna (absence
> of knowledge). This ajnAna (absence of knowledge) is removable by jnAna (
> ज्ञाननिवर्त्यत्वम्). This is in accordance with  the vArtika according to
> him.
>
> May be I am missing something. But this is how I understood the kannada
> translation also.
>
> Regards
>
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 6:35 AM Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Namaste Chandramouli ji,
>>
>> Thanks again for all these references to Sri SSS' works. I am responding
>> to you because you had shared his references, not because I consider you to
>> be an SSS follower - your disclaimer in this regard is well noted.
>>
>> I went back to read your responses to Sri Sudhanshu Ji and Sri Jaishankar
>> ji.
>>
>> Sri SSS has said this in relation to NS 3-7 (which you had kindly shared)
>> -
>> तत्राह 'सन्नज्ञातो भवेत्ततः' इति । अज्ञातत्वं सत्सामानाधिकरण्यम्
>> अविमुञ्चत् सत एव धर्मो न तु घटादीनां मिथ्याज्ञातानामित्यवगम्यते इत्यर्थः ।
>> एवं च अज्ञानस्याभावात्मकस्य कथं कारणत्वम् ? इत्याक्षेपः परिहृतो भवति ।
>> अज्ञातसत एव कारणत्वाभ्युपगमात् । यत् पुनरुक्तमज्ञानस्यावस्तुस्वभावत्वम्,
>> तन्मिथ्याज्ञानस्यापि समानम् । न हि ज्ञानबाध्यस्य क्वचिदपि वस्तुत्वं संगच्छत
>> इति प्रत्युक्तम् ।
>>
>> With respect to BUBV 1.4.371, Sri SSS has said this (again shared by you)
>> "ननु बृहद्वार्तिकेऽपि 'अस्य द्वैतेन्द्रजालस्य यदुपादानकारणम् । अज्ञानं
>> तदुपाश्रित्य ब्रह्म कारणमुच्यते ।।' (बृ. वा. १-४-३७१ ) इत्यज्ञानस्य
>> द्वैतोपादानकारणत्वं स्पष्टमुक्तम् । अतः द्वैतस्योपादानापेक्षस्य अभावेर-
>> कारणकत्वमेव ग्रन्थकृदभीष्टमिति प्रतीयते । मैवम्, द्वैतस्य
>> इन्द्रजालसदृशत्वोक्त्या मिथ्याध्यासत्वमेवोक्तमिति । अध्यासस्या- वस्तुत्वात्
>> उपादानादिकारणापेक्षा नैवास्ति । न च ग्रन्थकृता क्वचिदप्यध्यासोपादानत्वेन
>> अज्ञानं समुपन्यस्तम्, प्रत्युताधस्ता- दस्माभिरुपपादितनीत्या
>> मिथ्याज्ञानसंशयौ प्रत्यभावरूपाज्ञानस्यैव कारणत्वमत्राप्युक्तमिति गम्यते ।
>> तेन च अज्ञानं समुपाश्रित्य ब्रह्मैव कारणम् इति अज्ञातब्रह्मण एव कारणत्वं
>> प्रकृत- श्लोकाक्षरानुगुणमेवोच्यते इत्यवधेयम् ।"
>>
>> In both, there is a common reference to avastu-svabhAvatvam of adhyAsa -
>> (1) यत् पुनरुक्तमज्ञानस्यावस्तुस्वभावत्वम्, तन्मिथ्याज्ञानस्यापि समानम् and
>> (2) अध्यासस्यावस्तुत्वात् उपादानादिकारणापेक्षा नैवास्ति ।
>>
>> In Sri SSS' conception, there is no arthAdhyAsa (adhyAsasya avastutvAt),
>> there is only jnAnAdhyAsa, and therefore he does not see the need to
>> establish an upAdAna kAraNa for adhyAsa.
>>
>> So when the vArttikakAra says ajnAnam tadupAshritya brahma kAraNamucyate,
>> he interprets this to mean ajnAta brahmaNah eva kAraNatvam - causation is
>> only for the Brahman that is not known.
>>
>> The question is from whose perspective is Brahman the cause? According to
>> Sri SSS, it has to be the ajnAtA, the non-knower's perspective. So the
>> non-knower of Brahman considers Brahman to be the cause, and because of
>> this, Brahman is the cause.
>>
>> However, having dismissed ajnAna as the upAdAna kAraNa on account of the
>> dvaita-indrajAla being of the nature of adhyAsa (mithyAjnAna), Sri SSS does
>> not have an answer for why the vArttikakAra uses the word "upAdAna" kAraNa.
>>
>> If adhyAsa is only mithyAjnAna, i.e., a jnAnAdhyAsa alone, what is the
>> vArttikakAra's intent in using the word upAdAna kAraNa - is it simply a
>> frivolous usage?
>>
>> Secondly in the commentary to NS 3-7, Sri SSS quotes vArttika-s 1.4.437,
>> 1.4.438, 1.4.440 and 1.4.423
>> मित्युत्पत्तावनुत्पत्तिर्विरोधाद्बाध्यते यतः |
>> तद्बाधे नाप्यपेक्षास्ति मिथ्याधीबाधनं प्रति || BUBV  1.4.437
>>
>> मिथ्याधियोऽपि बाध्यत्वमज्ञानैकसमन्वयात् |
>> मूलध्वस्तौ हतं तच्चेन्मिथ्याधीः किं करोति नः || BUBV 1.4.438
>>
>> मेयरूपानुरोधित्वं मिथ्यासंशययोर्यदि |
>> सम्यग्ज्ञानात्तयोर्भेदो गम्यताम् केन हेतुना || BUBV 1.4.439 (Not quoted
>> by Sri SSS here, sharing for completion)
>>
>> अज्ञानं संशयत्वान्नो मिथ्याज्ञानात्तथैव च |
>> तयोस्तत्त्वविवक्षायामज्ञानं तत्त्वमुच्यते || BUBV 1.4.440
>>
>> Sri SSS quotes these and goes on to say, "तस्मान्मिथ्याज्ञानव्यतिरेकेण
>> नाज्ञानं नाम वस्त्वस्ति ज्ञाननिवर्त्यत्वमिति वचनं साहसमात्रमिति भावः |"
>>
>> However, it is not clear how he comes to this conclusion about ajnAna
>> from these BUBV verses. 1.4.437 says that upon the dawn of knowledge (of
>> the self), there is no rise of duality, because the nature of the two
>> (knowledge and duality) is in contradiction, and when *that* has been
>> sublated, there is nothing else expected for the sublation of adhyAsa.
>>
>> What is the entity that is referred to as तत् *that*? We look at the
>> previous verse, which is not quoted by Sri SSS.
>> तस्मादविद्यासम्भूतं नानात्वं प्रत्यगात्मनि |
>> ब्रह्मास्मीति तद्ध्वंसान्न क्वचिद्भेदधीर्यतः || BUBV 1.4.436
>> Therefore, multiplicity in the inner self is born out of ignorance. When
>> that has been destroyed by the knowledge "I am Brahman", there can be no
>> cognition of difference on account of it.
>>
>> The pronoun "tat" in the phrase "तद्बाधे" of BUBV 1.4.437 therefore is
>> referring to the ajnAna of BUBV 1.4.436, the previous verse. The purpose of
>> 1.4.437 therefore is not to say that there is nothing called ignorance
>> other than adhyAsa as Sri SSS concludes, rather, it is to say that adhyAsa
>> will not persist when its cause, ignorance has been destroyed.
>>
>> 1.4.438 says that the sublatability of mithyAdhI (adhyAsa) is on account
>> of it having samanvaya with ajnAna, and when the root (ajnAna) is
>> destroyed, what can adhyAsa do to us?
>>
>> 1.4.439 is ignored by Sri SSS because he things it does not have a role
>> to play in the discussion. However in this verse, the vArttikakAra is
>> hinting at a question - do mithyAjnAna and doubt have ajnAna as its cause
>> or not ? This verse takes the first alternative - If they do not have
>> ajnAna as its cause, and they arise from the knowledge of the object, then
>> there would be no basis to differentiate the two (adhyAasa and valid
>> knowledge).  But this would be clearly incorrect, as we would not know what
>> is valid knowledge and what is invalid.
>>
>> 1.4.440 is taking the alternative, if mithyAjnAna and doubt were caused
>> by ignorance. Now, with this issue itself (whether mithyAjnAna and doubt
>> were caused by ignorance), we had a doubt. Because we had a doubt here (nah
>> samshayAt), it follows that ignorance exists (because how would the doubt
>> arise otherwise). Similar is the case of mithyAjnAna elsewhere - as
>> mithyAjnAna occurs, it too is caused by ignorance and therefore ignorance
>> exists (mithyAjnAnAt tathaiva ca). When we examine the nature of those two
>> (tayoh tattva-vivakshAyAm) - doubt and mithyAjnAna - we arrive at the
>> conclusion that their nature is ignorance (ajnAnam tattvam ucyate).
>>
>> Therefore when we examine these verses together  - we arrive at the
>> opposite conclusion that Sri SSS arrived at. To recall, he had
>> said तस्मान्मिथ्याज्ञानव्यतिरेकेण नाज्ञानं नाम वस्त्वस्ति
>> ज्ञाननिवर्त्यत्वमिति वचनं साहसमात्रमिति भावः - but the vArttikakAra says
>> the opposite - तयोस्तत्त्वविवक्षायामज्ञानं तत्त्वमुच्यते - in examining
>> doubt and adhyAsa, we say that their nature is of ignorance.
>>
>> Once again, that ajnAna is the material cause of adhyAsa.
>>
>> Now, Sri SSS had also quoted BUBV 1.4.423 in support of his view. That
>> verse says
>>
>> किं भोः सदपि मानेन वस्तु साक्षान्निरस्यते |
>> तस्मिन्निरस्ते किं शेषं यस्मिन् मानस्य मानता || BUBV 1.4.423
>> Here the vArttikakAra is asking - if mithyAjnAna were real, would it be
>> sublated or not. Is a real object too sublated by valid knowledge? If it
>> was so sublated, what would remain (if the real could be sublated, nothing
>> at all would remain), that could be the basis for the validity of
>> knowledge?
>>
>> Again - Sri SSS takes this verse and interprets this as the basis to
>> argue that तस्मान्मिथ्याज्ञानव्यतिरेकेण नाज्ञानं नाम वस्त्वस्ति
>> ज्ञाननिवर्त्यत्वमिति वचनं साहसमात्रमिति भावः - however, the point that the
>> vArttikakAra is making here is not whether mithyAjnAna or ajnAna are the
>> nature of bhAva or abhAva, rather he is saying that a real entity cannot be
>> sublated. We have no problem with that.
>>
>> However, the crucial point is none of the verses that Sri SSS quotes,
>> lead us to the conclusion that there is no entity called ajnAna other than
>> mithyAjnAna (adhyAsa), as alleged by Sri SSS.
>>
>> In fact the opposite is true, by examining the verses BUBV 1.4.436 to
>> BUBV 1.4.440, we arrive at the conclusion that the vArttikakAra's view is
>> that upAdAna kAraNa of mithyAjnAna is ajnAna.
>>
>> The direct references for the upAdAna kAraNatva of avidyA below -
>> 1) अस्य द्वैतेन्द्रजालस्य यदुपादानकारणम् अज्ञानं BUBV 1.4.371
>> 2) मिथ्याधियोऽपि बाध्यत्वमज्ञानैकसमन्वयात् BUBV 1.4.438
>> 3) मूलध्वस्तौ हतं तच्चेन्मिथ्याधीः किं करोति नः BUBV 1.4.438
>> 4) तयोः तत्त्वविवक्षायाम् अज्ञानं तत्त्वमुच्यते BUBV 1.4.440
>>
>> This still leaves how NS 3.7 is to be understood, which I can take up
>> later (if others want to do it, they are free to of course).
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Venkatraghavan
>>
>> --
>> 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/CAL34aEmD05a2U6ZP9SQRs1y9YAJ69fbSm_ydMX1d0JfPFMqhHw%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAL34aEmD05a2U6ZP9SQRs1y9YAJ69fbSm_ydMX1d0JfPFMqhHw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
> --
> 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/CAEs%2B%2BdNHcVE_v-iYkGyhe_qxihDkCEyE8tRK_K8ey3xchp8bCg%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAEs%2B%2BdNHcVE_v-iYkGyhe_qxihDkCEyE8tRK_K8ey3xchp8bCg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>