[Advaita-l] [advaitin] what is abhava?

[Raghav Kumar Dwivedula]

Namaste Subbu ji

I was reminded of the counter-intuituve logic preferred for why avidyA is
not a bhAva entity (like a pot) and is "bhAva-rUpa" although pot is
regarded as bhAva inspite of being just avidyA-kArya,  viz.,
विनाशी भावः सादि |
यत्र यत्र विनाशि-भावत्वम् तत्र तत्र भाव-विलक्षणत्वम् ।

But avidyA being anAdi, it does not have sAditvaM, so avidyA is not a bhAva
padArtha like pot. (bAdhaka sattva is there which rules out bhAva word for
avidyA).

  We would expect the word bhAva to be in some sense a "stronger" category
than bhAva-rUpa, but the contrary is true. The bhAva-vilaxaNa avidyA being
the cause pervades the bhAva padArtha pot etc.

Om
Raghav




On Tue, 17 Sept, 2024, 12:27 pm Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l, <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Subbu ji.
>
> //That proves beyond doubt that the Shruti, Shankara and Sureshwara - all
> hold Ajnana to be a material, bhAvarUpa entity.//
>
> I think, by this instance, we can hold that -- ajnAna is an
> abhAva-vilakshaNa entity. The fact that it is presided by a devatA proves
> that ajnAna is abhAva-vilakshaNa entity.
>
> That is it.
>
> Should we say that it is a material entity? Because that would be
> contradictory to bhAva-vilakshaNatA of ajnAna.
>
> ajnAna is both bhAva-vilakshaNa and abhAva-vilakshaNa. The instances quoted
> by you prove its abhAva-vilakshaNatA imho.
>
> It is a very crucial point I feel.
>
> Regards.
> Sudhanshu Shekhar.
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>