[Advaita-l] [advaitin] 'The Jiva is Mithya' - an article in English

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Michael ji.

Bhava vilakshana - Please convey exactly what may be distinct from
>> Bhavatvam Brahman? Rather, it is an assumption of logic.
>
>
abhAva is bhAva-vilakshaNa. vishesha-abhAva such as pot-abhAva, and
nirvishesha-abhAva such as horns of hare are both distinct from
bhAvAtmaka-Brahman.

Further, avidyA, which is bhAva-abhAva-vilakshaNa is distinct from Brahman.
Also, avidyA-kArya such as pot, cloth are distinct from Brahman.

Their non-distinction from Brahman is stated in the sense of
non-distinction of the illusory snake from rope.



> abhAva contains within its ambit nirvishesha-abhAva and
>> abhAvAtmaka-avidyA-kArya as if to claim abhAva is an ontological entity
>> that is able to account for creation?
>>
>
Creation can be neither of Brahman, nor of nirvishesha-abhAva such as horns
of hare. It can only be due to avidyA i.e. avidyA-kArya. So, there is
nothing wrong in distinguishing abhAva between nirvishesha-abhAva and
abhAvAtmaka-avidyA-kArya. BhAshya also distinguishes them.

When snake is born, tAdAtmya-with-existence is also born. Born? Snake is a
>> notion not a birth. It is not even a notion created in time. There is no
>> snake.
>
>
In srishTi-drishTi-vAda, where pratikarma-vyavasthA is admitted, there is
no option but to admit the creation of an illusory snake at the time of
perception thereof.

In DSV, one can do away with this requirement. However, in that case, we
admit momentary appearance of entire universe and pratyabhijnA is denied.


> आरोप्योत्पत्ति कालोत्पन्नतादात्म्यापन्नं सत्सन्घट इति प्रत्यये अपरोक्षतया
>> भाति .
>>
>> "The arising of superimposition (āropya-utpatti) is experienced directly
>> (aparokṣatayā) in the cognition 'a pot exists' (sat-san-ghaṭa iti
>> pratyaye), where the pot (ghaṭa), produced in time (kāla-utpanna), is
>> assumed to have identity (tādātmya) with existence (sat)."
>>
>> Not Sankara, I'd bet, more likely, Vedanta Paribhasa? If you assume time,
>> you already assume superimposition.
>
>
It is by GauDa BrahmAnanda Saraswati Swamiji. It is in accordance with
BhAshya which admits identity of waking, dream and deep sleep (त्रयः
स्वप्ना जाग्रत्स्वप्नसुषुप्त्याख्याः).



> avasthA-ajnAna-kArya-avachchhinna-chaitanya.
>>
>> Chaitanya limited?
>
>
Yes. On account of avidyA. Just as we transact pot-space, similarly
avachchhinna-chaitanya.


> A wrong notion does not affect the Self - no need to delimit the Self.
>> AvasthA itself is a waking notion. Does Chaitanya experience different
>> states really? The notion of avastha appears only to one that assumes
>> waking to be the reality of all the states.
>
>
The delimitation of chaitanya is not from the frame of reference of
chaitanya. But from the frame of reference of avidyA. avasthA-traya is
spoken from the frame of reference of avidyA. From the frame of reference,
there are no avasthA, just as from the frame of reference of rope, there is
no snake.


> You cannot get away by using false notion. I will hold you there. Is false
>> notion also an appearance like snake? Or is false notion-1 also a false
>> notion-2? And then.... infinite regress.
>>
>> Correct though handled by Bhasyakara & Sureswara in several places and no
>> less incomprehensible than the finite Vedas teaching the Absolute.
>>
>
Please explain in your own words as to how the infinite regress is resolved.



> an addendum regarding false notion as infinite regress. A better answer is
>> that superimposition along with the idea of infinite regress, time,
>> causation and all the rest of this phenomenal appearance is anadi.
>> Appearance is not in time but in Consciousness.
>
>
Are you satisfied with this answer? The world is an appearance, you say.
Fine. Let us say, appearance-1. Now, is this appearance an appearance?

If not, it becomes Brahman, on account of being non-appearance.

If yes, then appearance-1 would require appearance-2. And it will go on.
There is no point of bringing in anAdi-tva here. It is anavasthA-dosha.

Further, what is appearance?

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.