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

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Sudhanshu ji

Thanks for the clarification - I took the first iti in
तस्मान्मिथ्याज्ञानव्यतिरेकेण नाज्ञानं नाम वस्त्वस्ति
ज्ञाननिवर्त्यत्वमिति वचनं साहसमात्रमिति भावः to mean "because there is no
object called avidyA other than mithyA jnAna" and the second "iti" to mean
"the words (it possesses the attribute of) sublatability by knowledge are
empty".

ie because it is of the nature of absence there is nothing entity there to
be sublated.

Kind regards
Venkatraghavan


On Mon, 26 Aug 2024, 23:22 Sudhanshu Shekhar, <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Chandramouli ji.
>
> I had read it in some book by SSS ji. However, I don't remember as to
> which book it was. Subbu ji has mentioned this quote in
> https://wp.me/pzMuO-35. If he recollects, he can help locate the source.
>
> Namaste Venkat ji.
>
> Re "Further, he accepts that there is some ajnAna different from
>> mithyA+jnAna
>> [something not accepted by him when he says
>> avidyA=mithyA-jnAna=jnAna-abhAva] and hence jnAna (avabodha) can remove
>> Atma-anavabodha. [तस्मान्मिथ्याज्ञानव्यतिरेकेण नाज्ञानं नाम वस्त्वस्ति
>> ज्ञाननिवर्त्यत्वमिति वचनं साहसमात्रमिति भावः]"
>>
>> Can you explain how you read तस्मान्मिथ्याज्ञानव्यतिरेकेण नाज्ञानं नाम
>> वस्त्वस्ति to mean that there is some ajnAna different from mithyA+jnAna?
>> Doesn't it say the opposite - that apart from mithyA jnAna there is no such
>> thing called ajnAna?
>>
>
> तस्मात् मिथ्या+ज्ञान व्यतिरेकेण न अज्ञानं नाम वस्तु अस्ति -- therefore,
> there is no other vastu by the name ajnAna other than mithyA+jnAna.
>
> SSS ji qualifies the above by the following - इति वचनं साहसमात्रम्. Thus,
> it follows that he does not subscribe to the idea of pUrvapakshI that
> "there is no other vastu by the name ajnAna other than mithyA+jnAna".
>
> Regards.
> Sudhanshu Shekhar.
>
>>