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

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

>
> EDIT: To make it clear, I do not admit that Ignorance is either an
> efficient or the material cause of the world, because it has no real
> existence at all. But it looks like, this way of cutting it at the root
> seems to be not settling the record (both in online discussions and offline
> discussions). Therefore, I thought that there is a need to discuss this in
> a slightly different way by first turning the argument away from material
> causality to efficient causality and then refute the entire causality
> argumentation (just as how it is dismissed in मूलाविद्यानिरासः Sanskrit
> topic number 134 or English translation topic number 131.)
> <https://www.facebook.com/groups/Sankaraadvaita/posts/1428104547855839/?comment_id=1428518994481061>
>

Namaste Michael ji.

The arguments were presented and Prasanth ji responded thereto by stating
that avidyA is not only the material cause but also the efficient cause.

If he wants to go against this conclusion of his own, he will have to
rewrite his own response. Otherwise no sense can be drawn out of his posts.

If you think there is something important he is saying - you can summarise
that. I will comment.

As such both the first reply and the subsequent reply by Prasanth ji hold
avidyA to be material cause. And he quotes bhAshya etc. You can yourself
decide what he is saying.


//EDIT: To make it clear, I do not admit that Ignorance is either an
efficient or the material cause of the world, because it has no real
existence at all//

What a misunderstanding!! For cause-effect relationship, is there a need of
"real existence"? Where does bhAshya or logic or anubhava say this? In
dream, there appears a cause-effect relationship which is itself illusory
along with both illusory cause and illusory effect. Same between avidyA and
adhyAsa.

//Therefore, I thought that there is a need to discuss this in a slightly
different way by first turning the argument away from material causality to
efficient causality and then refute the entire causality argumentation
(just as how it is dismissed in मूलाविद्यानिरासः//

He has not contradicted material causality. Efficient causality too is
agreed upon. Causality is also negated subsequently. So, what is the
difference?

One needs to be precise. Answer pin-pointedly. If you write one lakh words
in response - where is the precision?

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.

>