[Advaita-l] avidya vs maayaa - What is the difference? Part III
agnimile at gmail.com
Fri Dec 2 06:23:17 CST 2016
The credit should go to Appayya DIkshitar who presented it thus, I simply
copied it and showed it here.
I agree with the view presented by you below.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 10:10 AM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
> Thanks Venkat ji, for a fine presentation of the various views on
> Avidyā-Māyā concept. Since for both the entities sattva-rajas-tamas
> combine is the content, the difference between the two is only in the
> prādhānya of sattva or rajas-tamas pair. In any case Brahman is beyond even
> Īśvara where alone the potential (avyakta) for creation is present. The
> Mānḍūkya 7th mantra clearly states the Chaturtham as free from even such
> This Chaturtham alone is called by the name 'Nārāyaṇa' in the verse
> Shankara cites at the beginning of the BGB, as the Principle, Nirguna
> Brahman, beyond avyakta.
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> Namaste Chandramouliji,
>> What I meant to say was that some difference is admitted between the two
>> some AchAryas. To me, that is clear from the description of the prakriyas.
>> My preference is for both to be viewed as the same, but if someone else
>> wishes to hold them as different due to differences of function, effect,
>> etc. that is their prerogative. I don't think it harms siddhAnta.
>> Appayya DIkshitar may have talked about Bhamati elsewhere in the work, but
>> in this particular section that I looked at, these are the four views he
>> On 2 Dec 2016 9:29 a.m., "H S Chandramouli" <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>> > Namaste Sri Venkatraghavan Ji,
>> > Reg << In summary, the prevalent views are 1) one is a subset of the
>> > other 2) the
>> > two are different configurations of the same fundamental guNas 3) They
>> > two different amshas (parts) of the same prakriti, with one amsha being
>> > vikshepa pradhAna and the other AvaraNa pradhAna 4) they are absolutely
>> > same.
>> > Therefore, your view that avidyA and mAya have been considered as
>> > in VedAnta shAstra is correct, >>,
>> > I am surprised at the conclusion you have drawn. All the four options
>> > mean the same. Avidya and mAya constitute the same entity. They are
>> > considered different aspects or parts of the same entity in the four
>> > options you have cited. Hence they cannot be considered different as
>> > far as the four options you have presented are concerned.
>> > I am also surprised that Bhamati view perhaps is not covered in these
>> > four options. I do believe it could not have been leftout by Sri
>> > Dikshitar. Maybe by oversight you might have missedout. Just a guess.
>> > Though I am not sure I think mAya (as kArana for creation ) and avidya
>> > (as located in jivas) are considered different in Bhamati. I am open
>> > to correction. In the view of SSS avidya and mAya are different.
>> > Ofcourse his views are much later to the time of Sri Appayya
>> > Dikshitar.
>> > In my understanding of the bhashya, avidya and mAya are the same.
>> > Regards
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list