[Advaita-l] [advaitin] The Upanishad and Shankara hold 'tamas' darkness, to be a 'thing.'

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Chandramouli ji.

I cannot readily recollect if the sAkshi-bhAsyatva of tamas is mentioned
anywhere explicitly. If you can give a citation, I will be grateful.

As such, tamas having rUpa is accepted. So, what objection can probably
arise against its pramAtri-vedyatva?

Namaste Kalyani ji.

*argument 1*
the non-abhAvatva of darkness is proved by anumAna: तमः शब्द वाच्यो नाभावः,
स्वमात्रवृत्तिधर्मप्रकारकप्रतियोगिज्ञानाजन्यप्रत्यक्षविषयत्वाद्, घटवत्।

tamas is not abhAva, on account of being swa-mAtra-vritti-dharma-prakAraka,
being pratiyogI-jnAna-ajanya, and being pratyaksha-vishaya, just like a pot.

*argument 2*
Also, if tamas is an abhava,then you will not be able to describe its
pratiyogI.

*argument-3*

if one were to argue that darkness is not vishesha-abhAva but
nirvishesha-abhAva, then it is contradicted by the presence of vishesha
"black-ness".

I have merely outlined the arguments. For detailed explanation,
https://sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/what-is-darkness.pdf
can be seen.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.