[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: avidyA is adhyasta (superimposed) in AtmA

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Bhaskar ji.

When you are free handedly using some unrestrained adjectives on the
> Swamiji who has spent more than 6 decades in studying Advaita vedAnta and
> dedicated his whole life on Shuddha shankarAdvaita you wont feel any guilt
> but when you are getting back your own medicines it is sickening for you is
> it??
>

Well, I do not think I have ever used terms such as "joke" for whatever
SSSS ji has written. I might have questioned his understanding of bhAshya,
might have termed his understanding wrong etc, but I would not have used
terms such as joke.

Be that as it may, I think you have a point here Bhaskar ji. And hence,
both parties should preferably restrict to the topic and argument presented
and refrain from using unnecessary adjectives which do not serve any
purpose.

 Please add the celebrated commentator of Rigveda, SAyaNAchArya in the
> list, who also as per Bhaskar ji has been cracking jokes in his Rigveda
> commentary.
>
>
>
>    - This is what is called baseless allegations…have I anywhere said I
>    have already studied sAyana bhAshya  and understood fully and he is just
>    cracking jokes??  I am really sick and tired of this baseless claims.
>
> Bhaskar ji. I had presented the bhAshya by SAyaNAchArya on NAsadIya Sukta,
where AchArya says - आत्मतत्वस्यावरकरवान्मायापरसंज्ञं भावरूपाज्ञानमत्र तम
इत्युच्यते । Also, I had discussed the SAyaNa bhAshya on Rigveda 10.82.7 at
https://groups.google.com/g/advaitin/c/P8NPybf4AUA which holds same. There
are countless others, I just presented a few which just cannot be
understood in any other way.

These show that SAyaNa bhAshya is exactly in tune with what you call "last
advaitins" or "post-Shankara advaitins".

Since you dismissed the vyAkhyAna as joke, it naturally included SAyaNa
bhAshya as well.

However, if you do not wish to dismiss SAyaNa bhAshya as a joke on account
of having not read it, should you not extend this privilege to "later
advaitins" also which have similarly not been studied and understood by
your good self. That is a reasonable ask, I suppose.

Now, coming to the main issue:

//It has been already said that any talks about locus (ashraya) and object
(Vishaya) of the avidyA is hypothetical and any queries about it can arise
only from the transactional view point.//

The ajnAna-Ashrayatva and ajnAna-vishayatva is
ajnAna-kalpita/ajnAna-prayukta. It has been clearly said that
ajnAna-Ashrayatva and ajnAna-vishayatava of shuddha-Brahman is through
avidyA-drishTi only.

//Where there is duality, one who raises the question is himself ignorant
of the truth and avidyA is only a mental mixing up of the real and the
unreal.//

The jIva-tva is ajnAna-kalpita Bhaskar ji. Is it not? So, to even term
"jIva", you need avidyA prior to that. So, how can jIva be the Ashraya of
avidyA?

You said - avidyA is only a "mental mixing up" of real and unreal. So,
avidyA would require mind for its very conception. It is a mental mixing
up. So, mind is a requirement for avidyA. Right? That means mind cannot be
ajnAna-prasUta and hence cannot be anAtmA.

So, your understanding that avidyA is "mental mixing up" is downright wrong
being illogical.

//As for the locus of this avidyA is what he himself says on this point.
Is there any rocket science involved in this simple bhAshya vAkya
understanding (adhyAsa and sUtra 4-1-3)??//

Certainly it is not a rocket science, but there are nuances as pointed
above. The mind itself is superimposed in shuddha chaitanya. And
superimposition is preceded by ajnAna, ajnAna cannot have antah-karaNa or
jIva as Ashraya. That is quite simple to appreciate.

However, if one holds, as Sureshwaracharya holds, that shuddha Chaitanya is
the Ashraya of ajnAna, then through adhyAsa of antah-karaNa with shuddha
chaitanya, even antah-karaNa can be said to have ajnAna!! Just as
antah-karaNa-vritti having reflected-chaitanya is stated as jnAna.

//avidyA is neither jeevAshrita nor brahmAshrita it is in transactional
world kevala karaNa dOsha and when one realizes his svarUpa avidyA is not
there to anyone.//

So, karaNa does not require ajnAna for its manifestation!! That is against
advaita vedAnta.

//You can construct fanciful theories around this basic tenet and bottom
line is simply this based on sarvalOka pratyaksha.//

Sir, adhyAsa is sarva-lOka-pratyaksha. "I am man" is sarva-lOka-pratyaksha.
But it is an adhyAsa. Similarly, ajnAna is antah-karaNa-stha is example of
adhyAsa. Please apply mind -- how can antah-karaNa be without avidyA?? That
will make antah-karaNa non-anAtmA!!


Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.