[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: Bhagavad Gita - As it actually is | Sanatana Dharma | Sri Shankara Bhagavatpada & Bhakti | Sringeri

[Raghav Kumar Dwivedula]

Pranams Bhaskar ji

I do appreciate your crusade to prove avidya is abhAva while mAyA is
anirvacanIyA.

But sadly, the 14.27 bhAShya cannot be used to prove their difference.

You can see Sudhanshu ji’s post where it was shown how the mAyA/avidyA
equivalence does not get affected even if Shakti (Ishvara) is asserted as
having ananyatvaM with shuddha brahman.

Note that in this context  BGB 14.27, the word Shakti is not being used for
inert mAyA but for Ishvara. And that Ishvara (who is Shakti) is
non-different from Brahman (this latter fact is I think accepted by all).

Sudhanshu ji had written -
“Shakti i.e. mAyA i.e. avidyA has shuddha NirguNa Brahman as its Ashraya.

Ishwara is bimba, jIva is pratibimba, mAyA = avidyA is the reflecting
medium.

Both Ishwara and jIva require avidyA. Their very conception is dependent on
avidyA. Hence, avidyA cannot have them as the Ashraya. Only shuddha Brahman
can be logically said to be Ashraya of avidyA.

So, bimba without bimba-tva is shuddha Brahman. And avidyA has that shuddha
chit as the Ashraya.”


Om
Raghav












On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 10:24 AM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at hitachienergy.com>
wrote:

> praNAms Sri Raghav Kumar prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
> I understand you to be saying that - When we say shakti and shaktimat are
> non-separate (in this context of gita 14.27) we are referring to NB and
> mAyA.
>
> >  Yes, if we see the bhAshya it is clearly saying so.  So, now since the
> bhAshya is saying :  the power of god by means of which brahman promotes
> well being etc. SAME brahman I am, and power and possessor of that power is
> one and the same, this is the observation (ityabhiprAyaH).  What does it
> mean??  Brahman and his power (mAya or according to you prabhuji-s avidyA)
> are one and the same, so brahman is avidyA and avidyA is brahman, is this
> the siddhAnta that we have to understand from mAyA/shakti and avidyA
> abhinna vAdins??
>
> And it’s valid to say,  NB mAyayA pratiShThate/  pravartate (Although in
> several other contexts like mama mAyA duratyayA, the reference is - Ishvara
> and mAyA are shaktimat and shakti and non-separate.)
>
> >  Again this statement too would show us how ridiculous it is to
> invariably equate mAya and avidyA 😊
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
>
>