[Advaita-l] bhAvAbhAva vilakshaNa avidyA is an alien theory to Shankara's PTB

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms
Hare Krishna

I am not addressing any points raised in this discussion by prabhuji-s, as I don’t think I would find time to address those individual points / observations if they reply.  Overall as per Sri SSS, indescribable avidyA, it’s capability to cover brahman itself and projecting something else, it’s upAdAnatvat (material cause) it’s bhAva rUpatva etc. are later inventions by vyAkhyAnakAra-s and these theories never found a place either in PTB nor in vArtika.  At some place Sri SSS explains in vArtika though there is mention about upAdAnatva it is used in the sense jnAna agrahaNa and it is definitely not implied to propagate notorious theory of mUlAvidyA.  Sri Chandramouli prabhuji must be aware of it as he is familiar with Sri SSS’s works.

First of all, I am really surprised, how a logically inclined mind/s in this group, blindly accepting some vyAkhyA just it is saying avidyA is bhAvAbhAva vilakshana and at the same time it is a solid thing like chair and table and to prove this they have gone to the extent that even darkness (prakAsha abhAva) is also a solid thing like table and chair in a room!!?? Don’t they want to use their logical brain to find out any logical fallacies in these theories!!??  Moreover,  there is another theory we heard that this avidyA is sAkshisiddhA to establish that it is an existing ‘thing’ (vastu).  If these theories are questioned then they resort to this theory of anirvachaneeyatva 😊  They justify their stand by saying : No, no, this avidyA which is the material cause for nAma, rUpa, adhyAsa etc. is neither sat nor asat nor sadasat, nor it is bhinna nor abhinna, nor bhinnaabhinna, nor sAvayava (having parts/components) nor niravayava (not having parts) nor ubhayAtmaka etc. etc. Over all to KISS :  they assert it is simply an anirvachaneeya and there is no ‘edamittham’ explanation for it.  Even though there is neither any support for this in PTB nor any support of any yukti (logical explanation) or anubhava.  There is absolutely no illustration to assert that there is some bhAvAbhAva vilakshaNa avidyA has transformed itself in the form of world.  The snake in the rope is mere bhrAnti jnAna and it is anubhavAtmaka/loka prasiddha (so says bhAshyakAra), nowhere it can be established that in the rope, a mysterious ‘snake’ which is bhAvAbhava vilakshaNa (or anirvachaneeya) has been produced 😊 Hence this anirvachaneeya avidya or bhAvAbhava vilakshaNa avidyA is shruti / yukti / bhAshya / anubhava viruddha to be discarded without any hesitation.

Moreover there is an extensive discussion in this group about The Law of Excluded Middle by MCC prabhuji,  that a thing must either exist or not exist; there is no third, mysterious ontological category. But as per mulAvidyAvAdins this anirvachaneeya avidyA is an ontological one.  Defining this avidyA an ontological one and at the same time neither existing nor non-existing makes it logically impossible to comprehend.

Moreover, one important thing that we have to contemplate is if avidya is argued in such a way that it has the power of covering the brahman itself (a positive veil (avarana)) and also has the potency to produce nAma rUpa jagat (avidyA shakti which is the material cause of the jagat and adhyAsa) then it must be an actual, objective entity (like clouds blocking the sun or chair in the room). If it is a real entity, it cannot be defined merely as something "inexplicable” or bhAvAbhAva vilakshaNa.

From all these it is once again quite evident that this theory of bhAvAbhava vilakshaNa, anirvachaneeya avidyA is just an alien theory which hardly finds a place in shankara’s PTB.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar