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

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Venkat ji.


> I don't quite understand what you are saying. Let us take the siddhi quote
> you had shared -  न च तर्हि प्रातरनुभूतचत्वरे गजज्ञानाभावज्ञानं कथमिति
> वाच्यम् ; ज्ञानानुपलब्ध्यैवेत्यवेहि । अनुपलब्धिज्ञानं च भावरूपाज्ञानेन
> लिङ्गेन ।
>

I am sorry for not being clear enough.

Advaita Siddhi follows the above quote by this:  तथा हि-पूर्वकालेऽहं,
गजज्ञानाभाववान्, गजाज्ञानवत्त्वात् , यन्नैवं तन्नैवम् , यथा
गजज्ञानवानहमिति, *एवं सर्वत्राज्ञानस्य ज्ञानाभावव्याप्यत्वेन तदनुमापकत्वम्*
।

AchArya is explaining as to how bhAvarUpa ajnAna is the linga. He gives the
anumAna:

the morning-me (paksha),
gaja-ajnAna (linga),
ghaja-jnAna-abhAva (sAdhya).
vyatirekI-drishTAnta: me-with-gaja-jnAna (sAdhya-abhAva) [is co-present
with gaja-ajnAna-abhAva]

So, AchArya says that ajnAna is everywhere vyApya and jnAna-abhAva is
vyApaka. *एवं सर्वत्राज्ञानस्य ज्ञानाभावव्याप्यत्वेन तदनुमापकत्वम्*.
Similarly, everywhere, ajnAna implies jnAna-abhAva on account of ajnAna
being the vyApya of jnAna-abhAva.

So, what happens is this. We know ajnAna on account of it being
sAkshi-bhAsya. Thereafter, through anumAna, we infer jnAna-abhAva.

We employ the anumAna:  यत्र यत्र अज्ञानम्, तत्र तत्र ज्ञानाभाव:, यन्नैवं
तन्नैवं, यथा ज्ञानवति (ज्ञानाभाव-अभाव-वति) मयि अज्ञानं नास्ति

[This anumAna is not presented in Advaita Siddhi. This is just created by
me to convey my point and is directly based on the example given of
gaja-jnAna-abhAva.]

So, if you observe, bhAvarUpa-ajnAna is the linga in the anumAna through
which we infer the sAdhya jnAna-abhAva. This is happening on account of
vyApti-jnAna. Therefore, jnAna-abhAva-jnAna is jnAna-karaNA-janya and not
jnAna-karaNa-ajanya.

Hence, it cannot be called anupalabdhi.


> The siddhikAra is saying bhAva rUpa ajnAna is the linga for the cognition
> of jnAna abhAva (anupalabdhi jnAnam = upalabdhi abhAva jnAnam = jnAna
> abhAva jnAnam). bhAvarUpa ajnAna is not a jnAna karaNa, so the cognition of
> jnAna abhAva born from it, is jnAna karaNa ajanya only. The definition of
> anupalabdhi as ज्ञानकरणाजन्याभावानुभवासाधारणकारणमनुपलब्धिरूपं प्रमाणम् is
> met.
>

But how from bhAvarUpa-ajnAna linga, we have jnAna-abhAva-jnAna is the
question. It is through vyApti-jnAna.


> 1) It is jnAna karaNa ajanya - the linga for it is bhAvarUpa ajnAna, which
> is not a type of jnAna. The cognition of ajnAna is not a jnAna either. As
> ajnAna is sAkshi bhAsya, its cognition is not a "jnAna", for one to argue
> that the cognition of jnAna abhAva that it leads to, is jnAna-karaNa-janya.
> It is not a case like dhUma jnAna leading to vahni jnAna, where the dhUma
> jnAna is an antahkaraNa vRtti.
>
> Therefore, what you are referring to as an *anumAna *of jnAna abhAva with
> bhAvarUpa ajnAna as the hetu / vyApya / linga is in fact not an anumAna at
> all, but an anupalabdhi.
>

As discussed above.


>  2) jnAna abhAva jnAna is a case of abhAva anubhava - one is directly
> aware that there is no cognition. It is not a case like the shAbda abhAva
> jnAna (like someone telling me that my friend is not at home).
>

Then what is the point of presenting this anumAna - पूर्वकालेऽहं,
गजज्ञानाभाववान्, गजाज्ञानवत्त्वात् , यन्नैवं तन्नैवम् , यथा
गजज्ञानवानहमिति? Clearly ajnAna is vyApya and jnAna-abhAva is vyApaka. And
the jnAna-abhAva-jnAna is by applying the vyApti-jnAna.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.