[Advaita-l] [advaitin] 'Avidya lesha' ('samskāra') admitted by the Upanishads, Bh.Gita and Shankara

[V Subrahmanian]

On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 3:00 PM 'Bhaskar YR' via advaitin <
advaitin at googlegroups.com> wrote:

> praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji
>
> Hare Krishna
>
>
>
>    - Bit free today at office, hence more posts.
>
>
>
> You have not understood the fundamental concept pertaining to Avidya
> lesha/samskara.
>
>
>
>    - You have not made it clear who avidyA lesha is possible in the
>    paramArtha jnAni when he has the realization that he is akartru-abhOktru in
>    all the three times.  avidyA does not have any parts and it is not a solid
>    thing to say after effacement of avdiyA some lesha /traces will continue
>    (like ashes after burning the wood) nor it has any capacity to create
>    saMskAra even after it itself completely eradicated.  We cannot give
>    dviteeya Chandra, digbhrAnta examples to prove avidyAlesha as it is the
>    consolation answers provided by bhAshyakAra to satisfy the ignorants who
>    are still seeing the ‘activities’ of paramArtha jnAni.  Whereas his true
>    nature of sashareeratvaM and its reality etc. has been cleared by
>    bhAshyakAra himself in samanvayAdhikaraNa bhAshya.
>
>
Actually the above is addressed to Shankara's 'samskara'.

>
>
> If you had, you would not be linking it to Krishna and Shiva. It is
> correct to link it to Yama dharmaraja because he himself says in the
> Upanishad that he had performed great karma to attain this post of Yama.
>
>
>
> Ø     Even Krishna, vishNu and shiva is not the paramArtha rUpa of
> paramAtman, is it not??  If that is the case, then there is no need to
> differentiate paramArtha jnAni and shiva-vishNu, especially when brahma
> jnAni himself realizing that shivOhaM.  By the way what is the difference
> between svarUpa jnAna of the paramArtha jnAni and paramArtha tattva behind
> the shiva-vishNu??  Is it something different to say shiva-vishNu donot
> have avidyA but paramArtha jnAni even though knowing that he is parabrahman
> will be having rAga-dvesha like ordinary ajnAni-s??
>

Shiva, Vishnu, etc. are not jivas who do sadhana and then get paramartha
jnana.  So, they have no such thing called samskara. The concept of
samskara is only post-jnana but in the case of Shiva, etc. there is no such
post-jnana. They are already jnanis.

>
>
> The 4.22 bhashya says this: आत्मनः कर्तृत्वाभावं पश्यन्नैव किञ्चित्
> भिक्षाटनादिकं कर्म करोति, लोकव्यवहारसामान्यदर्शनेन तु लौकिकैः
> आरोपितकर्तृत्वे भिक्षाटनादौ कर्मणि कर्ता भवति । स्वानुभवेन तु
> शास्त्रप्रमाणादिजनितेन अकर्तैव ।
>
>
>
> Nobody has questioned the Jnani's kartrutva/bhoktrutva abhava
> anubhava/buddhi.
>
>
>
>    - Please note he is akartru/abhOktru even before realization, that is
>    the reason why the jnAna fetch him the knowledge of, nitya, Shuddha, buddha
>    mukta paramArtha jnAna which is his own svarUpa and which is absolutely
>    free from rAga-dvesha / shOka-mOha.
>
>
Everyone knows that the svarupa is free from raga, etc. But the mind is the
one which had raga etc. The Jnani's during the jivanmukti will be having
raga, etc. that is required for the prarabdha to operate.

>
>    -
>
>
>
> In fact the above sentence is proof of the Jnani available still in the
> body and that the bhikshATanAdi is happening due to Avidyalesha/samskara.
>
>
>
>    - Due to avidyA lesha is your fabrication to the bhAshya sentence
>    there is room for this conclusion in this bhAshya vAkya.  See the bhAshya
>    vAkya : लौकिकैः आरोपितकर्तृत्वे भिक्षाटनादौ कर्मणि कर्ता भवति , it is
>    only bystanders who attribute these anishta-s to HIM, but he is absolutely
>    free from all this.
>
>
Here too, the Atman of the Jnani is free from all this. But the body-mind
of the Jnani will be performing all such activities. The bystanders can see
only the body and infer the mind through his body-language and
superimpose the kartrutva/bhoktrutva to him. They cannot distinguish
between him and his Atman. This is the subtle point Shankara is making in
that sentence. Nowhere is Shankara implying the bizarre scenario of the
bystanders imagining a body-mind of the Jnani and attributing kartrutva,
etc. to him. This is the implication behind your objection to Shankara's
usage of samskara.

>
>    - For that matter don’t you see that parameshwara is responsible for
>    activities of srushti, etc.? Are not the avatAra purusha-s like rAma,
>    Krishna etc. doing or engaging themselves in vigorous Karma? Do you still
>    argue that they are doing so due to their respective avidyAlesha or with
>    rAga dvesha??  No, that is not siddhAnta drushti, though actions may be
>    taking place in the body of ā jnAni or avatAra purusha-s because of the
>    prArabdha or leela, they fully aware that he is completedly unattached to
>    them. It is only this conviction which is jnAna. But others, who may not be
>    able to elevate themselves to this lofty description of the jnAni would
>    think that jnAni is still experiencing the prArabdha, suffering from
>    rAga-dvesha, if not suffering / experiencing at least he is however having
>    the rAga-dvesha due to his avidyA lesha etc.   But he does not think so,
>    because shruti assures that : vidvAn sa ehaiva brahma yadyapi dehavAniva
>    lakshyate sa bhahmaiva san brahmApyeti.  And you cannot paste the
>    rAga-dvesha to brahman, can you??
>
>
No one is pasting anything to anyone. It's for the Jnani's mind that
Shankara is accepting samskara.

>
>    -
>
>
>
> In fact what Shankara has said about a Jnani in the above bhashya, he has
> said for himself in the BSB 4.1.15   *कथं* *हि* *एकस्य* *स्वहृदयप्रत्ययं*
> *ब्रह्मवेदनं* *देहधारणं* *च* *अपरेण* *प्रतिक्षेप्तुं* *शक्येत** ?* How
> indeed can anyone question the fact that the Jnani has the akarta abhokta
> brahma bhaava in his heart* and at the same time* inhabiting a body?
>
>
>
> Ø     I think we have discussed this innumerable times in our earlier
> discussion about jnAni’s own set of BMI, how this needs to be reconciled
> with siddhAnta vAkya that is discussed in detail in samanvayAdhikaraNa
> bhAshya.
>

The above is in no way contradicting the samanvaya bhashya vakya about
ashariratva, which is the fact for every jiva. Every jiva is always free
from sharira.  It is adhyasa that is shed due to samyagjnana. The jnani
knows his asharariratva status while the others do not. By that much you
cannot say that the sharira itself has vanished.

>
>
> You are actually challenging what Shankara has said above in no
> unmistakable terms.
>
>
>
> Ø     No actually I am challenging the vyAkhyAna which unwarrantedly
> pastes the rAga-dvesha to paramArtha jnAni in the name of avidyA lesha /
> saMskAra by diluting the some bhAshyavAkya-s.  I have very valid reason to
> challenge this stand since bhAshyakAra in an unambiguous terms explained
> and denied the continuation of kAma-klesha for an enlightened person.
> Desire is the ONLY motive for all actions and that being absent for a
> person who has realized adviteeya brahman there can be no more rAga-dvesha
> in him.  See the bruhad Upanishad and bhAshya : when all the desires
> residing in one’s heart have been got rid of, then the mortal being becomes
> immortal and attains brahman here in this very life.  Just as the cast-off
> slough of a snake would be lifeless in an ant-hill, so also does the body
> of the enlightened person lie there, AND HE IS NOW (REALLY) BODILESS, THE
> PRAANA, BRAHMAN ALONE, THE LIGHT OF PURE CONSCIOUSNESS ALONE.
>

He is free of body, etc. and the mind has realized that he is pure
Consciousness. But the body continues as the Gita says: nava dvaarey
purey dehi....

>
>
> Yes, mulavidya is not a sasmkara, but it is the one responsible for the
> remaining of samskara. In other words, the samskara is the lesha of that
> mula avidya which has been made nirmUla by aparoksha jnana.
>
>
>
> Ø     Is paramArtha jnAni aparOksha jnAni or parOksha jnAni??  If his
> jnAna is aparOksha how can there be a place for avidyA lesha/saMskAra??  Is
> there any possibility to say two different things can occupy the same place
> at same time to argue in the jnAni there is both jnAna and ajnAna in the
> form of saMskAra / lesha at the same time!!??
>

Paroksha and aparoksha are both jnanams for the mind. samskara is also for
the mind only. Samskara is not causing bandha to the Jnani. So, samskara
and aparoksha jnana can happily coexist in the mind. Only Atma jnana and
Atma ajnana cannot coexist like darkness and light.

warm regards
subbu

>
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>
> bhaskar
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "advaitin" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/VI1PR06MB663851AD000E2FB6053643278414A%40VI1PR06MB6638.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/VI1PR06MB663851AD000E2FB6053643278414A%40VI1PR06MB6638.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>