[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Upadesha SAhasrI 18.43

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Michael ji.

Your whole effort here is to prove that avidya is "determined through
> logic" thus objectifying an avidya implying a positive something other than
> AtmA, in this case the AbhAsa. This is determining the undeterminable by
> the same undeterminable logic - clearly circular and a contradiction.
>

avidyA, which is AtmA-AbhAsa-Ashraya, is not determined through logic. It
is sAkshi-bhAsya. However, the anAdi-tva, anirvachanIya-tva, bhAvarUpa-tva,
jnAna-nivartya-tva etc, which are the attributes of avidyA, are proved by
pramANa. They are not sAkshi-bhAsya. So, here also, ajnAna per se is
sAkshi-bhAsya, but bhAvarUpa-anirvachanIya-tva-vishishTa-ajnAna which is
nothing but visheshaNatA-avachchhedaka-prakAraka-jnAna is pramANa-janya.

It has been shown in so many vakya-s that avidya cannot be determined
> logically! It is not anumana siddha but anubhava siddha - undeniably
> evident by experience. The question to resolve is the nature of this
> experience and not to prove the existence of the snake.  We only have to
> prove there is no snake.
>

As explained above. You correctly say that ajnAna is not pramANa-siddha but
anubhava-siddha. This is what I mean by saying that ajnAna is
sAkshi-bhAsya. However, as explained above, the visheshaNa-vishishTa-ajnAna
is pramANa-vedya.

Please note - there is no quarrel with respect to sAkshi-bhAsya vastu. We
both agree that we are ignorant. But there is a dispute in
pramANa-gamya-vastu. One who has the pramA, has the valid knowledge. And
one who doesn't have that, fails to have correct knowledge.

Since anirvachanIyatva of ajnAna is pramANa-siddha, both of us are having
different opinion about that.

So, the crux of the matter is this -
bhAvarUpatva-anAditva-anirvachanIyatva-vishishTa-ajnAna is pramANa-gamya.
Whereas ajnAna per se is sAkshi-bhAsya.

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.