[Advaita-l] [advaitin] 'BhAva' cannot be a product of 'abhAva' - Shankara

[Ananta Chaitanya [Sarasvati]]

Namaste Sudhanshuji,

On Thu, Aug 29, 2024, 12:11 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
wrote:

> *In all these places, BhAshyakAra has made the usage of term
> "avidyA-adhyAsa". Had avidyA and adhyAsa been identical, this usage of
> avidyA-adhyAsa would not only have been superfluous but also having the
> defect of punarukti. It would mean avidyA-avidyA or adhyAsa-adhyAsa, which
> is meaningless.*
>

There is another issue here. If avidyA is abhAvarUpa, then adhyAsa being
avidyA, it is also abhAvarUpa. Then what seems to be the issue with non
existing adhyasta saMsAra?! Oh, wait, but it appears, it binds, etc. Is
that called abhAvarUpa? Its really laughable as to they can't see the
meaning of anirvachanIya mithyA. And they have the audacity to point
fingers at the vyAkhyAnakAras.

It reminds me of Pujya Swamiji (PS) Dayananda Sarasvatiji's joke that some
Western professor of "Vedanta" in an university abroad told him that he had
been teaching for multiple decades and understands everything, except for
"2 small things": mithyA and sat!! PS was speechless. 😀

>
gurupAdukAbhyAm,
--Ananta Chaitanya
/* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
That, owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */


>