[Advaita-l] adhyAsa - part VII - evaluation of the difficulties

Srikrishna Ghadiyaram srikrishna_ghadiyaram at yahoo.com
Wed Jun 4 14:57:53 CDT 2003

Hari Om !!

--- Jay Nelamangala <jay at r-c-i.com> wrote:
> SriKrishna,
> Please read the very first posting for the defn of
> adhyAsa.
> VivaraNa-pramEya-Samgraha (VPS)  as:
> "adhyAsastu anyasmin anyatva drishtihi"
> (To superimpose is to mistake one thing for another)

I am happy we have a common definition to work with.
Please show me if the definition has any other
presence of or lack of a reason, as part of this
Adhyasa situation. As I see it, it does not pose any
restriction based on our ability to substantiate by
reason or not. So, even if you comeup with some reason
why there is adhyasa in some specific situation, it
does not ask us to abandon the 'adhyasa' proposition
in case of Atma-anatma, because we do mistake atma and

You also quoted that one contra-example is enough to
disprove a theory/generalisation. That is right. But,
by siting several examples from one domain where it
does not work, you can not derail a theory meant for a
specific domain either. Sure, you can borrow anologies
to make me understand, but you can not generalise.

Though you may comeup with sound arguments, you still
can not avoid adhyasa of rope-snake etc. for your own
self, even on the same rope or another rope another
time or even immediately. Ofcourse the situation is
differnt in case of Atma-anatma (I guess we are not
into that debate now).

So, prove to me that there is no mistaking atma for
anatma. Tell me a way I can see my atma separate from
this body etc. anatma, unless your definitions are
different for these terms. I am not interested in your
paramatma at all. Let him be where he is. Just tell me
how I know two parts of myself i.e atma and anatma, so
I know that there is no mistaking at all.

Thank you for your help.

Om Namo Narayanaya !!


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list