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

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Hari Om,

I would like to thank Venkatraghavan ji for the off-Gmail discussion in
this context. I present here my considered conclusion:

In waking, the jnAna-abhAva, *present in sushupti*, is known through
arthApatti which is essentially vyatirekI-anumAna. This jnAna-abhAva is
jnAna-mAtra-abhAva (because antah-karaNa is merged).

In waking, the jnAna-abhAva, *present in waking*, is known through
arthApatti/vyatirekI-anumAna/anupalabdhi. This jnAna-abhAva is not
jnAna-mAtra-abhAva (because antah-karaNa is present).

The word "jnAna" in jnAna-abhAva refers to antah-karaNa-vritti and not
avidyA-vritti. jnAna refers to that which is virodhI of ajnAna.
avidyA-vritti not being virodhI of ajnAna is not included in jnAna-abhAva.

It is incorrect to hold that *present jnAna-abhAva* is known in waking only
through anupalabdhi. jnAna-abhAva or for that matter any abhAva is not
exclusively known through anupalabdhi pramANa. They can be known by anumAna
and arthApatti as well. But since abhAva-jnAna arising from
anumAna/arthApatti is jnAna-karaNa-janya, they are different from
anupalabdhi-pramA which is jnAna-karaNa-ajanya.

This is evident from the following reasoning:

Any abhAva-pramA arising through anupalabdhi-pramANa necessarily uses a
vyApti wherein ajnAna is vyApya and jnAna-abhAva is vyApaka. Otherwise,
there would be anavasthA dosha in anupalabdhi. Still, since the vyApti is
used in pre-penultimate stage and not penultmate stage, it remains
jnAna-karaNa-ajanya.

How?

Everyone agrees on - If x were present, there would be x-upalabdhi.

*The proponent of anupalabdhi says:*

Since there is x-upalabdhi-abhAva, there is x-abhAva.

*The opponent says:*

Just as x-abhAva cannot be known by pratyaksha, x-upalabdhi-abhAva cannot
be known by pratyaksha either.

So, just as you needed x-upalabdhi-abhAva to know x-abhAva, you need
x-upalabdhi-upalabdhi-abhAva to know x-upalabdhi-abhAva.



*So, there is anavasthA.The siddhAntI replies*: not so. X-upalabdhi-abhAva
is not required to be known by another anupalabdhi. However, instead, it is
known by anumAna.

I know x-upalabdhi-abhAva through x-ajnAna by employing the following
anumAna:

यत्र यत्र अज्ञानम्, तत्र तत्र उपलब्ध्यभावः, यन्नैवं तन्नैवम्, यथा
घटोपलब्धिवति मयि घटाज्ञानं नास्ति।

So, by this vyatirekI anumAna, which is essentially arthApatti, I infer
x-upalabdhi-abhAva (vyApaka) from x-ajnAna (vyApya).

So, I go and look for Devadatta in his home. He is nowhere to be seen. From
this, I don't conclude Devadatta-upalabdhi-abhAva. When Devadatta is not
seen by me in his home, I get a sAkshi-bhAsya Devadatta-ajnAna. This
Devadatta-ajnAna becomes the vyApya in vyatirekI anumAna. And I infer
Devadatta-upalabdhi-abhAva.

Thereafter, I can pretty well employ anupalabdhi-pramANa to conclude
Devadatta-abhAva.

*The crux is this*: x-perception-abhAva is inferred by using
vyatirekI-anumAna wherein sAkshi-bhAsya x-ajnAna is vyApya and
x-upalabdhi-abhAva is vyApaka.

BAlabodhinI says: उपलब्धेर्विषयविषयकं भावमूतम्‌ अज्ञानं साक्षिसिद्धम्‌ ;
साक्षिसिद्धेन अज्ञानेन उपरब्धेरभावोऽनुमीयते इति न अनवस्थागन्धोऽपि ।
साक्षिसिद्धेन भावमूताज्ञानेन अनुमित उपलब्ध्यभाव: उपलभ्याभावः बोधयति । स च
बोधः परोक्षरूप एव।

https://archive.org/details/xlhS_advaita-siddhi-sanskrit-with-commentary-bala-bodhini-by-yogendra-natha-sharma-ed/page/n561/mode/2up

Now, this clearly proves that upalabdhi-abhAva is a known from
anumAna-pramANa whereas upalabhya-abhAva is known from anupalabdhi-pramANa.

Thus, no rule can be made that present-abhAva is known only from
anupalabdhi-pramANa. While upalabdhi-abhAva is jnAna-karaNa-janya,
upalabhya-abhAva is jnAna-karaNa-ajanya. That is the distinction.

Having said that, jnAna-abhAva can also be known from anupalabdhi. There is
no incorrectness in that:

If jnAna were there, there would be jnAna-upalabdhi.
Since there is jnAna-upalabdhi-abhAva, there is jnAna-abhAva.

There is nothing wrong in this anuaplabdhi-pramANa. But this is not the
exclusive pramANa.


Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.