[Advaita-l] [advaitin] How jnAnAbhAva can cause adhyAsa !!??

[Raghav Kumar Dwivedula]

Namaste Sudhanshu ji
Thanks for clarifying it was from Advaita Siddhi. I thought that too was
from sugamA which would have been too glaring!!

On Thu, 12 Sept, 2024, 5:00 pm Sudhanshu Shekhar, <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste,
>
> I rechecked SugamA and my memory served me right. It is indeed stated
> there by SSS ji that jnAna-abhAva, termed by him as ajnAna, is prAk-abhAva.
>
> *तर्हि कतमोऽयं ज्ञानाभाव इति चेत् । प्रागभाव एवास्तु । *
>
> The web-link is
> https://adhyatmaprakasha.org/php/bookreader/templates/book.php?type=sanskrit&book_id=008&pagenum=0001#page/45/mode/1up
>
> Now, it is submitted that the concept of prAk-abhAva has been shredded to
> pieces in advaita sampradAya. Details can be seen in
> pratyaksha-pramANa-vichAra-in-ajnAna. Those who hold jnAna-abhAva as
> jnAna-prAk-abhAva should answer these challenges or else accept that there
> is nothing like prAk-abhAva.
>
> None of these well-settled principles, whereby prAk-abhAva has been
> rejected, have been mentioned by SSS ji in his SugamA.
>

Thats an excellent reference from sugamA. It would be interesting if there
are there other references to prAgabhAva of jnAna in sugamA. (Although the
reference quoted by you is conclusive enough to show that jnAna-abhAva for
SSS ji being jnAnasya *prAgabhAva*, such jnaana abhAva is definitely
bhAShyAxara-bahirbhAvaH.)



> Further, he postulates jnAna of this jnAna-prAk-abhAva through anubhava
> (sAkshI). He accepts that anupalabdhi cannot work here.  ननु नायं
> ज्ञानाभावः, अभावप्रमाणेनानवगमादित्युक्तम् । *सत्यमुक्तम्, दुरुक्तं तु तत्*
> । *न हि ज्ञानं प्रमाणगम्यम् । येन तदभावोऽपि प्रमाणगम्यः स्यादिति* शङ्कयेत
> । *येनैव त्वनुभवेन गम्यते ज्ञानम्, तेनैव ज्ञानाभावस्याप्यवगमान्न कस्यापि
> कुचोद्यस्यात्र संभवोऽस्ति । *
>
> So, his logic is - only if x is known by pramANa, x-abhAva is required to
> be known by pramANa. Since jnAna is not known by pramANa, but by anubhava
> (sAkshI), jnAna-abhAva is not known by pramANa either. It is known by same
> anubhava (sAkshI) by which jnAna is known.
>
> Now!! jnAna is known by sAkshI. jnAna-abhAva is being known by sAkshI as
> per SSS ji. So, there is jnAna-abhAva-jnAna present as per SSS ji. And yet,
> there is jnAna-abhAva as per him!! Self-contradiction!! 😀
>
> Further, Swamiji did not realize that by making jnAna-abhAva a
> sAksi-vedya-vastu, he is positing its bhAvatva. Those who hold jnAna-abhAva
> as abhAva can never accept its upalabdhi. It has to be anupalabdha.
>
> यद्यपि ज्ञानं साक्षिवेद्यम्, तद्द्वारा तदवच्छेदको विषयश्च साक्षिवेद्यः; *तथापि
> ज्ञानाभावो न साक्षिवेद्यः, तस्यानुपलब्धत्वात्* ।
>

To confirm - the contradiction is the following
येनैव त्वनुभवेन गम्यते ज्ञानम्, तेनैव ज्ञानाभावस्याप्यवगमान्न कस्यापि
कुचोद्यस्यात्र संभवोऽस्ति |
(That anubhava ("intuition" by sAxI) by which jnAnam arises, by that same
anubhava (sAxi's vedya), jnAna-abhAva is known.

but any sAxi-vedya viShaya is not abhAva.
So we can say
साक्षिवेद्यत्वात् अभावविलक्षणत्वम् ?


Why is SSS ji constrained to say jnAna-abhAva is not
anupalabdhi-pramANa-gamya? Because that requires pratIyogI jnAnam?

Om
Raghav

>
> If some discussion follows wherein someone seeks to argue as to how
> jnAna-abhAva is prAk-abhAva and is sAkshi-vedya, I will delve into it
> further. As of now, it is enough to demonstrate that SSS ji's idea of
> jnAna-abhAva as prAk-abhAva and anubhava-vedya is illogical and
> self-contradictory.
>
> Regards.
> Sudhanshu Shekhar.
>
>