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

[Michael Chandra Cohen]

Namaste Sudhanshuji, Adhyasa is not to be denied by infinite regress as
adhyasa is self evident and needs no further explanation. Logic does not
trump experience.

We have discussed abhava jnana and pratiyogi ad nauseum. I prefer to let it
rest.

On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 7:17 AM Sudhanshu Shekhar <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Michael ji.
>
> Infinite regress is resolved when a ground for one's proposition is proven
>> (see #1 below in 'ways to address...")  Adhyasa as anadi gives jagat and
>> samsara a timeless presence = experience. Experience proves adhyasa first
>> hand to one who knows the meaning of the term. Therefore there is no
>> defect in saying the false notion is itself false.
>>
>
> "False notion" is itself "false" (1) OR "false notion" is itself "false
> notion" (2)? If (1), then content of false notion would become true, and if
> (2), it is infinite regress.
>
> AND, if this leads your self inquiry to a zen like halt, so be it - a good
>> thing!
>>
>
> No. It leads to vitiating the model projected by you.
>
>
>> As for your dive deep into the unfathomable world of perception and
>> Vedanta Paribhasa, I suggest it is quite avoidable as it is based on
>> accepting Prasthanatraya Bhasya Vedanta with an empirical realist's
>> perspective. And that is based on one or two bhasya citations only which
>> position is summarily refuted in the following link by the arguments of AJ
>> Alston, Prasanth Netiji and Ramanatha Keralapuraji, Further, analyzing
>> perception is not the aim of Vedanta rather falsifying its appearance is
>> our endeavor. Why divert from Gaudapada teachings?
>>
>
> Let us take the central objection -- abhAva-jnAna is possible without
> pratiyOgI-jnAna. SSSS ji gives example of EskImO -- and this example has
> been discussed and rejected. No substantial defence was offered by any of
> the learned persons mentioned above.
>
> You have not answered the questions raised by me:
>
> 1. Define appearance.
> 2. Is appearance an appearance?
> 3. Is avidyA an appearance?
> 4. Is "horns of hare" an appearance?
>
> Regards.
> Sudhanshu Shekhar.
>
>