[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Bhavarupa Ajnana Tamas (Ignorance) - Nrsimha Tapini Upanishad and Gita Bhashya

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

>
> Namaste Chandramouli ji
>
> //  आत्माग्रहातिरेकेण तस्या रूपं न विद्यते ।
>
> अमित्रवदविद्येति सत्येवं घटते सदा ॥ १७९ ॥ //
>
> //  AtmAgrahAtirekeNa tasyA rUpaM na vidyate |
>
> amitravadavidyeti satyevaM ghaTate sadA || 179 || //,
>
> Translation Sri Balasubrahmanian //  Its nature does not consist in
> anything other than the non-perception of the Self. Only if it is said that
> the term avidya is like the term amitra, it is always tenable //
>
> Notes by Sri Balasubrahmanian   //  Avidya is not negative (abhAva), but
> something positive. It should not be interpreted negatively as the prior
> non-existence of knowledge (jñāna-prāgabhava). It is a positive entity
> which conceals the nature of the Self. Concealment (avarana) is what it
> does; and it constitutes the nature of avidya. The work of concealment will
> not be possible in the case of a negative entity, what is non-existent. The
> Advaitin does not admit the existence of any negative entity at all.
> Therefore, the term avidya does not mean the absence or non-existence of
> knowledge, since the mere absence or non-existence of knowledge cannot do
> the work of concealing or veiling the Self.
>
> The word avidya must be explained in the same way as the word amitra is
> explained. The negative prefix *a*  in the word amitra conveys the idea
> that the person denoted by the word is other than or opposed to a friend.
> In the same way, the negative prefix *a* in the word avidya conveys the
> sense that the thing denoted by the word is something other than vidya  or
> something opposed to vidya. It does not convey the idea of the absence of
> vidya.
>
> Anandagiri explains the expression आत्माग्रह (AtmAgraha) which means non-
> perception of the Self as the concealment of the Self  **आत्मनोऽग्रहो
> नामाऽऽवरणमाच्छादनं ** (Atmano.agraho nAmA.a.avaraNamAchChAdanaM)  //.
>
> Thus, as per Bhashya as well as Vartika of Swami Sureswaracharya, ,
> ज्ञानाभावः (j~nAnAbhAvaH), or equivalent terms often used like अग्रहण
>  (agrahaNa), तत्वाग्रहण (tatvAgrahaNa) etc,  should be understood to mean
> a भावपदार्थ (bhAvapadArtha ), as ** not allowing (the true nature of the
> Atman) to be revealed **, and not as an अभावपदार्थ (abhAvapadArtha ),
> **absence of Knowledge
>
>
> This seems to suggest that agrahaNa = avidyA and it is same as AvaraNa
> (आत्मनोऽग्रहो नामाऽऽवरणमाच्छादनं). That it is not nirvishesha abhAva like
> horns of hare is quite clear.
>
> However, the bhAshya-vAkya, uses agrahaNa, viparIta-grahaNa and
> samshaya-jnAna as a product of their nimitta (timira-dosha/avidyA). And
> thus makes a distinction. This nimitta is stated as avidyA and is
> AvaraNa-Atmaka i.e. its very swarUpa is AvaraNa. (तामसे च आवरणात्मके
> तिमिरादिदोषे सति अग्रहणादेः अविद्यात्रयस्य उपलब्धेः ॥ Once AvaraNa-Atmaka
> is there, there is perception of agrahaNa etc.)
> (अग्रहणविपरीतसंशयप्रत्ययास्तन्निमित्ताः - please note the word
> #tat-nimitta. The story does not stop at avidyA-traya namely agrahaNa etc.
> We need to account for their nimitta also.)
>
> The concept is further analysed in Advaita Siddhi where avidyA, AvaraNa
> and AvaraNa-kritya are distinguished.
>
> So, AvaraNa = avidyA-chit-sambandha
>
> AvaraNa-kritya = agrahaNa, viparIta-grahaNa and samshaya-jnAna.
>
> Both AvaraNa and AvaraNa-kritya are avidyA-prayukta and hence they can be
> referred by the word avidyA.
>
> None of these are nirvishesha abhAva like horns of hare.
>
> Regards.
> <#m_-7905942490821117998_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>