[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Asked of Chatgpt: "Are there any definitions or descriptions that depict a positive ignorance in Sankara's commentary on the Brahma Sutras or classic 10 Upanishads whether in context or otherwise?

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Michael Ji,

The more Chatgpt is referred to, the more hilarious the answers turnout. I
better drop out from the discussion.
Hope you dont mind.

Regards

<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virus-free.www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 3:29 PM Michael Chandra Cohen <
michaelchandra108 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, Chandramouli, you are correct so I asked Chatgpt for further
> clarification. Its response:
>
> To determine whether "mithya jnana" (false knowledge) or "mithya ajnana"
> (false ignorance) is more appropriate according to Shankara's *Adhyasa
> Bhashya* (the introduction to his commentary on the Brahma Sutras), we need
> to carefully analyze the context and the definitions provided by Shankara.
>
> ### Key Points in Adhyasa Bhashya
>
> 1. **Adhyasa (Superimposition):**
>    - Shankara defines adhyasa as the superimposition of the attributes of
> one thing onto another. Specifically, in Advaita Vedanta, it refers to the
> superimposition of the non-self (anatman) onto the self (atman).
>
> 2. **Avidya (Ignorance):**
>    - Shankara describes avidya as the root cause of adhyasa. This
> ignorance is characterized by not knowing the true nature of the self
> (agrahana), mistaking the non-self for the self (anyatha agrahana), and
> having doubts about the true nature of the self (samshaya).
>
> ### Mithya Jnana vs. Mithya Ajnana
>
> 1. **Mithya Jnana (False Knowledge):**
>    - This term would imply knowledge that is false or incorrect. In the
> context of Shankara's philosophy, it would refer to the erroneous knowledge
> where one perceives the world and the self incorrectly due to ignorance.
>    - Shankara does describe the nature of ignorance as leading to false
> knowledge or erroneous perceptions (e.g., mistaking the body for the self).
> This false knowledge is a result of adhyasa.
>
> 2. **Mithya Ajnana (False Ignorance):**
>    - This term is less commonly used and can be seen as tautological
> because ignorance itself is a lack of true knowledge, making the notion of
> "false ignorance" somewhat redundant.
>    - In the context of Shankara's writings, avidya is already understood
> as a false understanding or misapprehension, so calling it "mithya ajnana"
> may not add meaningful clarity.
>
> ### Correct Term According to Adhyasa Bhashya
>
> Based on Shankara’s *Adhyasa Bhashya* and the general terminology used in
> Advaita Vedanta:
>
> - **Mithya Jnana (False Knowledge)** is the more appropriate term.
> Shankara's discussions on avidya focus on how ignorance leads to false
> knowledge or erroneous superimpositions (adhyasa). This aligns with the
> concept of mithya jnana, where ignorance manifests as false or incorrect
> knowledge.
>
> - **Avidya as Lack of True Knowledge:** Shankara emphasizes that avidya is
> the root cause of superimposition and erroneous perceptions, which are
> forms of false knowledge (mithya jnana). He does not typically describe
> ignorance itself as being false in a separate sense (mithya ajnana).
>
> ### Conclusion
>
> In conclusion, **mithya jnana (false knowledge)** is the correct term
> according to Shankara’s *Adhyasa Bhashya*. This term effectively captures
> the nature of ignorance leading to erroneous superimpositions and false
> perceptions, consistent with Shankara's teachings on avidya and adhyasa.
>
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 11:20 AM H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Namaste Michael Ji,
>>
>> Also note that **veiling** by avidyA  is partial, not complete.
>>
>> Also, reg //  1. **mithyā + ajñāna**:
>>    - **mithyā**: This means "false" or "illusory." It refers to something
>> that is not real or not ultimately true but appears to have some form of
>> existence.
>>    - **ajñāna**: This means "ignorance" or "lack of knowledge." It
>> denotes a lack of true knowledge about reality //,
>>
>> This understanding is totally different from both the  standard debated
>> versions of  **mithyā + ajñāna** and   **mithyā + jñāna**. It makes the
>> meaning  **  This means "ignorance" or "lack of knowledge" which is "false"
>> or "illusory" **. That would be great indeed. ** false or illusory lack of
>> knowledge **.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>> Virus-free.www.avast.com
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>> <#m_9070131862368327257_m_-2426595095013727954_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 2:14 PM H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Namaste Michael Ji,
>>>
>>> What an interpretation!!
>>>
>>> //  1. **Veil as Lack of Knowledge:**
>>>    - **Absence of True Knowledge:** In this interpretation, the "veil"
>>> represents the absence of true knowledge. Just as a veil obstructs one's
>>> vision, ignorance obstructs one's understanding of the true nature of the
>>> self (Brahman). When the veil is removed, one sees clearly, implying that
>>> when ignorance (lack of knowledge) is dispelled by knowledge, the true
>>> nature of the self is revealed //,
>>>
>>> **obstruction**, **removal of veil** clearly imply a **positive
>>> entity**. They represent *positive* causes which *prevent* rise of **True
>>> Knowledge**. It is not **absence of True Knowledge**. It is **prevention**
>>> of True Knowledge. When it is destroyed, True Knowledrge automatically
>>> arises.
>>>
>>> There are any number of verses in BUBV, TUBV of Swami Sureswaracharya
>>> which can be cited in support. But if we are not in agreement on this
>>> fundamental understanding of what **absence** and **prevention** of True
>>> Knowledge means, there is no purpose served in citing those verses.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>> Virus-free.www.avast.com
>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>> <#m_9070131862368327257_m_-2426595095013727954_m_-7891458689928811879_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 1:54 PM Michael Chandra Cohen <
>>> michaelchandra108 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> yes, Chandramouli, I too questioned the term, 'veil' and Chatgpt
>>>> answered concerned Suresvara's take on ignorance and the use of the term
>>>> though the same applied to my earlier question of veil in Bhasyakara alone.
>>>>
>>>> The metaphor of ignorance as a "veil" can be interpreted in two
>>>> different ways, which depend on the broader philosophical context in which
>>>> the metaphor is used. Let's explore both interpretations, focusing on
>>>> whether it indicates a positive ignorance or a lack of knowledge.
>>>>
>>>> ### Ignorance as a Veil
>>>>
>>>> 1. **Veil as Lack of Knowledge:**
>>>>    - **Absence of True Knowledge:** In this interpretation, the "veil"
>>>> represents the absence of true knowledge. Just as a veil obstructs one's
>>>> vision, ignorance obstructs one's understanding of the true nature of the
>>>> self (Brahman). When the veil is removed, one sees clearly, implying that
>>>> when ignorance (lack of knowledge) is dispelled by knowledge, the true
>>>> nature of the self is revealed.
>>>>    - **Analogous to Darkness:** This view is analogous to darkness
>>>> being dispelled by light. Darkness itself is not a positive entity; it is
>>>> simply the absence of light. Similarly, ignorance is the absence of
>>>> knowledge, and when knowledge is gained, ignorance disappears.
>>>>
>>>> 2. **Veil as Positive Ignorance:**
>>>>    - **Substantive Obstruction:** In the positive ignorance
>>>> interpretation, the veil could be seen as a substantive obstruction that
>>>> actively hides the truth. This implies that ignorance is not just a passive
>>>> absence of knowledge but a positive presence that creates false perceptions
>>>> or superimpositions (adhyasa).
>>>>    - **Misleading Influence:** Here, the veil (ignorance) has a
>>>> misleading influence, causing one to perceive the non-self (anatman) as the
>>>> self (atman), and to see duality where there is actually non-duality.
>>>>
>>>> ### Context in Suresvara's Writings
>>>>
>>>> To determine which interpretation aligns with Suresvara's views, let's
>>>> consider his usage of the veil metaphor and his explicit statements about
>>>> avidya in his works.
>>>>
>>>> #### Evidence from Suresvara's Works
>>>>
>>>> 1. **Naiskarmya Siddhi:**
>>>>    - Suresvara often describes avidya in terms of a lack of discernment
>>>> and knowledge, emphasizing the removal of ignorance through
>>>> self-realization. For example, in *Naiskarmya Siddhi 1.43*: "The cessation
>>>> of ignorance is brought about by the realization of the true nature of the
>>>> self, just as darkness is dispelled by light."
>>>>    - This suggests that he views ignorance as an absence of knowledge,
>>>> akin to darkness being dispelled by light.
>>>>
>>>> 2. **Brhadaranyaka Upanishad Vartika:**
>>>>    - Suresvara discusses the superimposition (adhyasa) caused by
>>>> ignorance but focuses on the correction of this false perception through
>>>> the acquisition of knowledge. In *Brhadaranyaka Upanishad Vartika 1.4.328*,
>>>> he states: "Avidya is the ignorance that misidentifies the self with the
>>>> non-self. It is dispelled by the knowledge of the self."
>>>>    - Here, avidya is again presented as a lack of true knowledge,
>>>> corrected by gaining the right understanding.
>>>>
>>>> 3. **Taittiriya Upanishad Vartika:**
>>>>    - Suresvara uses the metaphor of light dispelling darkness to
>>>> describe the role of knowledge in removing ignorance. For example, in
>>>> *Taittiriya Upanishad Vartika 1.6.1*: "Avidya, the ignorance of the self,
>>>> is dispelled by the light of knowledge, just as darkness is dispelled by
>>>> the rising sun."
>>>>    - This metaphor aligns with the interpretation of ignorance as a
>>>> lack of knowledge.
>>>>
>>>> ### Conclusion
>>>>
>>>> Based on Suresvara's writings and his consistent use of metaphors and
>>>> explanations, it is evident that:
>>>>
>>>> - **Ignorance as a Veil:** Suresvara's use of the veil metaphor
>>>> indicates a lack of knowledge rather than a positive ignorance. The veil
>>>> obstructs the true understanding, and its removal (through knowledge)
>>>> reveals the true nature of the self.
>>>> - **Lack of Knowledge:** Suresvara emphasizes that avidya is an absence
>>>> of true knowledge about the self, which is dispelled by gaining
>>>> self-knowledge. This is analogous to light dispelling darkness, where
>>>> darkness (ignorance) is simply the absence of light (knowledge).
>>>>
>>>> Therefore, Suresvara views ignorance as a lack of knowledge, and the
>>>> metaphor of a veil in his writings supports this interpretation.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 10:08 AM H S Chandramouli <
>>>> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Namaste.
>>>>>
>>>>> Reg  //  There are many others which can be interpreted to lead to
>>>>> the same conclusion. However I am not reproducing those statements //,
>>>>>
>>>>> I mean that there are many others which can be interpreted to lead to
>>>>> the conclusion that avidyA is a **positive entity**.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>>> Virus-free.www.avast.com
>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>>> <#m_9070131862368327257_m_-2426595095013727954_m_-7891458689928811879_m_4610382430435744052_m_-151721763602988837_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 1:32 PM H S Chandramouli <
>>>>> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Namaste Michael Ji,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Copying below a few statements from your post which directly
>>>>>> contradict the conclusion. There are many others which can be interpreted
>>>>>> to lead to the same conclusion. However I am not reproducing those
>>>>>> statements.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> //   **Non-Duality**: Shankaracharya emphasizes that Brahman is the
>>>>>> only reality and avidya is simply the veil over this truth  //.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> //   **Absence of Positive Ignorance**: Shankaracharya does not
>>>>>> typically define avidya as a positive, active force. Instead, he
>>>>>> characterizes it more as a lack or veil over the true knowledge of Brahman
>>>>>> //.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Notice the use of the word **veil**. Is **veil** an existent or a
>>>>>> nonexistent? Those who present avidyA as a **positive entity** very often
>>>>>> use the same term, namely **veil** , to convey the meaning that avidyA is a
>>>>>> **positive entity**. I also follow the same.  How do you understand it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>>>> Virus-free.www.avast.com
>>>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>>>> <#m_9070131862368327257_m_-2426595095013727954_m_-7891458689928811879_m_4610382430435744052_m_-151721763602988837_m_2869339440993174639_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 10:16 AM Michael Chandra Cohen <
>>>>>> michaelchandra108 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Adi Shankaracharya's commentaries on the **Brahma Sutras** and the
>>>>>>> **classic Upanishads** are pivotal in understanding his view on **avidya**
>>>>>>> (ignorance). The notion of avidya as positive ignorance versus a mere
>>>>>>> absence of knowledge is a significant interpretative issue. To address your
>>>>>>> question, let's delve into the definitions and descriptions of avidya in
>>>>>>> Shankaracharya’s works, focusing on whether they depict avidya as a
>>>>>>> positive ignorance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ### Analysis of Avidya in Shankaracharya’s Commentaries
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #### **1. Brahma Sutras**
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> **Brahma Sutras (Brahmasutras) Commentary:**
>>>>>>> - **Sutra 1.1.1**: The Brahma Sutras start with "Athato Brahma
>>>>>>> Jijnasa," which translates to "Now, therefore, the inquiry into Brahman."
>>>>>>> Shankaracharya’s commentary here emphasizes the need to understand Brahman,
>>>>>>> the ultimate reality, and addresses the role of avidya in obscuring this
>>>>>>> knowledge.
>>>>>>> - **Role of Avidya**: In his commentary, Shankaracharya typically
>>>>>>> describes avidya in terms of its effects, such as causing mistaken identity
>>>>>>> and suffering, rather than as a positive entity. For example, he describes
>>>>>>> avidya as leading to the false perception of duality but does not always
>>>>>>> characterize it as an active, positive force.
>>>>>>> - **Non-Duality**: Shankaracharya emphasizes that Brahman is the
>>>>>>> only reality and avidya is simply the veil over this truth. The focus is on
>>>>>>> dispelling ignorance through knowledge rather than combating an independent
>>>>>>> force of ignorance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #### **2. Classic Upanishads**
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> **Chandogya Upanishad Commentary:**
>>>>>>> - **Chapter 6, Section 1**: Shankaracharya explains the concept of
>>>>>>> avidya as the cause of mistaken identity. He describes how individuals
>>>>>>> mistake themselves for the body and mind rather than recognizing their true
>>>>>>> nature as Brahman.
>>>>>>> - **Positive Ignorance**: Shankaracharya’s commentary here does not
>>>>>>> typically depict avidya as an active, positive force but rather as the
>>>>>>> absence of knowledge about the true nature of the Self. The focus is on
>>>>>>> removing this ignorance to reveal the ever-present reality of Brahman.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> **Mandukya Upanishad Commentary:**
>>>>>>> - **The Three States**: In his commentary on the Mandukya Upanishad,
>>>>>>> Shankaracharya discusses the states of consciousness (waking, dreaming, and
>>>>>>> deep sleep) and the ultimate reality (Turiya). He uses the concept of
>>>>>>> avidya to explain how the Self is obscured in these states but does not
>>>>>>> present avidya as an active force.
>>>>>>> - **Avidya’s Role**: Avidya is discussed as the source of ignorance
>>>>>>> about the Self’s true nature, leading to the mistaken perception of the
>>>>>>> world. Again, the treatment focuses on the lack of knowledge rather than an
>>>>>>> independent force.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> **Brhadaranyaka Upanishad Commentary:**
>>>>>>> - **Chapter 4, Section 3**: Shankaracharya discusses the nature of
>>>>>>> Brahman and how ignorance leads to misunderstanding. He describes avidya as
>>>>>>> obscuring the true knowledge of Brahman but does not elaborate it as a
>>>>>>> positive ignorance.
>>>>>>> - **Avidya’s Nature**: In this commentary, avidya is addressed as
>>>>>>> the lack of true knowledge, rather than as a positive entity causing
>>>>>>> illusions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ### Summary
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In Shankaracharya’s commentaries on the **Brahma Sutras** and the
>>>>>>> **classic Upanishads**, **avidya** is primarily described in terms of its
>>>>>>> effects—such as leading to mistaken identity and the perception of
>>>>>>> duality—rather than as a substantive, positive force. The general approach
>>>>>>> in these texts is to emphasize the removal of ignorance through direct
>>>>>>> knowledge of the Self (Atman) and Brahman.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #### **Key Points:**
>>>>>>> - **Absence of Positive Ignorance**: Shankaracharya does not
>>>>>>> typically define avidya as a positive, active force. Instead, he
>>>>>>> characterizes it more as a lack or veil over the true knowledge of Brahman.
>>>>>>> - **Focus on Knowledge**: The primary solution offered in
>>>>>>> Shankaracharya’s commentaries is to gain true knowledge (atma-jnana) to
>>>>>>> dispel avidya, which aligns with the idea that avidya is not a positive
>>>>>>> ignorance but rather a lack of understanding.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thus, **Shankaracharya’s position**, based on the commentaries on
>>>>>>> these texts, supports the interpretation of avidya as an absence of
>>>>>>> knowledge rather than as a positive ignorance. This interpretation aligns
>>>>>>> with the perspective of Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati, who also
>>>>>>> emphasizes that avidya is best understood as the lack of true knowledge
>>>>>>> rather than an independently existing positive force.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> 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/CAAz9PvFw0SiKPrkUg-j%2BhYn%2BViWA56vzgeZnkdbuFH1%3DS7idZA%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAAz9PvFw0SiKPrkUg-j%2BhYn%2BViWA56vzgeZnkdbuFH1%3DS7idZA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>