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

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

>
> Namaste Subbu ji.

> Similarly when Avidya is said to be bhAvarUpa it is bhAvasadrsha and not
> bhAva itself.
>
Indeed. Both bhAva and bhAvarUpa-avidyA have sAdrishya. And that sAdrishya
is abhAva-vilakshaNatA.

> On the basis of Yama being stated to be the presiding deity for ajnana,
> like Manas, and tamas, it has to be a 'some thing'.
>
Here, I would request that we can keep it to be "non-abhAva".

Non-abhAva does not automatically mean "some thing".

Non-abhAva-tva and non-bhAva-tva can co-appear in avidyA.

If we do not do so, we will be unable to uphold anAditva of avidyA. And
also, we will be charged with merely using the term bhAvarUpa, when in
reality, all we are intending is "some thing" which is nothing but bhAva
like chair, table.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.

>