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

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Chandramouli ji.

Are you under the impression that ESV and TSV in the impugned VivaraNa
statement is my imagination?

The discussion is centred around mithyAtvam. There is no reference to ESV
> vis a vis STV. Why should the answer then be related to ESV?.
>
You should check the index prepared by S Subramanya Shastri ji in
PanchpadikavivaraNa book by Dakshinamurthy MaTha. Please see the index
reference for page no. 100 at the following link:

https://archive.org/details/DQJe_panchapadika-of-sri-padmapadacarya-with-the-commentaries-of-vivarana-tattvadipan/page/n64/mode/1up

Page no 100, where the impugned statement of VivaraNa occurs is categorised
as एकसत्तावाद-सत्तात्रैविध्यवादयोः निर्देश:

Page no 100 is at
https://archive.org/details/DQJe_panchapadika-of-sri-padmapadacarya-with-the-commentaries-of-vivarana-tattvadipan/page/n168/mode/1up

So, it is crystal clear, as certified by S Subramanya Shastri ji that the
impugned VivaraNa statement is regarding ESV-TSV. I don't think I need to
say anything further unless you dispute the scholarship of Shastri ji.

The objection is ** you hold that silver is mithyA because of
> traikAlika-atyanta-abhAva of silver. But the response **this is not
> silver** does not lead to that conclusion. Hence the definition is wrong
> **. There is no reason to bring in the idea of ESV at all. The discussion
> is as per STV thus far.
>
You may recheck your conclusions in light of evidence provided. I am not
responding to other comments of yours. I have elaborated my understanding
in unambiguous terms and with lot of precision. I have nothing more to add.

However, I wish to know your final take on whether you agree with
Subramanya Shastri Ji's categorisation or not.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.