[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Kilogram concluded

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Many thanks Venkatraghavan ji for the response.


>From E-2's standpoint, both E-1 and E-2 exist, and E-2 derives its
> existence from E-1, so E-2 depends on E-1 for its existence, but E-1
> depends on nothing else. E-2 is needed to explain the appearance of the
> world and why E-1 is not immediately apparent.
>

Here, I would submit the following for your consideration. If both E1 and
E2 exist (from E2 standpoint) - then there is loss of advaita, from E2
standpoint.

So, to preserve advaita, even from the E2 standpoint, E2 should not be
admitted.


> However, because we are concerned with questions and answers, we have to
> provisionally concede the existence of E-2 until all questions are answered.
>

Then, provisionally, should we accept loss of advaita.


> Both E-2 and the absence of E-2 have the reality of E-2 only. Therefore
> there is no harm to advaita, whether through E-2 or the absence of E-2.
>

Yes. But from the E2 standpoint, since E2 is different from E1 (though
dependent), there is loss of advaita.

Once there is nothing to ask, there is nothing to answer, E-2 has served
> its purpose and the concession of provisional existence for E-2 that we
> made, can be withdrawn.
>

This means that we are in the standpoint of E1. From which, obviously, E2
is null and void.

Question is from the standpoint of E2.

Do we accept provisional loss of advaita from the E2 standpoint?

Actually we should word it better. There are two standpoints -- ignorance
standpoint and Brahman standpoint. From ignorance-standpoint, E2 and E1
("subtle form of existence"-of-ignorance and paramArtha-sat-of-Brahman) are
admitted. From Brahman-standpoint, only E1 is admitted.

So, from ignorance-standpoint, if E2 and E1 are accepted as different (even
though dependent), loss of advaita would remain.

In my understanding, the reply is as under (kindly share your views):

1. Even from ignorance-viewpoint, there is only E1. There is nothing like
E2. E2 is null and void. (Eka-sattA-vAda). Hence, there is advaita. The
existence seen in ignorance does not belong to ignorance, but belongs to
Brahman.

2. From ignorance viewpoint, there is E1 and E2 (different from but
dependent on E1). However, advaita here is spoken
vyadhikaraNa-dharma-avachchhinna-tvena. Hence, there is no harm to advaita.
[This is not primary advaita siddhAnta. But only tushyatu-durjana-nyAya.
This is what is sattA-traividhya-vAda.]

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.