[Advaita-l] DSV in the advaitasiddhi: adhyAsa is substantiated

[Anand Hudli]

Shri Venkatraghavanji,

I wrote:

>>
There is absolutely no scope for vyAvahArika sattA in DSV, since existence
implies its dRShTi. There cannot be objective reality. Even the bhAmati
school which advocates DSV NJV, realizes this and admits a "kind" of
vyavhArika sattA based on sAdRshya of the worlds created by jIvas. If you
see a pot and I see the "same" pot, the same-ness is due to the
*similarity* of the world created by you and the world created by me. The
two pots are effectively different. This is a kind of pseudo-vyavAhArika
sattA. Of course, in the DSV EJV, there is no other jIva and any objective
reality is ruled out.
>>

A couple of clarifications. If by vyAvahArika sattA is meant something that
exists independent of dRShTi, then the six entities
(except shuddhacit) jIva, etc. mentioned before qualify to be called
vyAvahArika. They are not created by dRShTi. In that case, one may object
and say sattA traividhya which was denied, has been brought back into the
system. However, it is only a dispute over names, because all the objects
of the world, jagat, including jagat itself, are clearly treated as
prAtibhAsika. The term vyAvahArika means different things in SDV and DSV.

The other clarification is regarding another flavor of DSV that is found in
VidyAraNya's works, such as the brihadAraNyaka-vArtika-sAra, where it is
stated "yena yad dRshyate tattu tena sRShTaM svakarmaNA| dRshyasya
bhrAntirUpatvAt darshanaM sRShTirucyate|| (1.5.7)". The commentator on this
verse, MaheshvaratIrtha, interprets it in light of the Ishvara sRShTi and
jIva sRShTi concept that is found in the PanchadashI, so as to reconcile
both views. Ishvara creates the objects of the world, but the jIva views
them as belonging to three categories- upAdeya (to be obtained), heya (to
be avoided), and udAsIna (indifferent). This *dRShTi* of the jIva towards
the objects of the world is his sRShTi and Ishvara has nothing to do with
it. Hence, the world is jIva-kartRka-sRShTi again. Further, if we consider
Ishvara sRShTi only, even that is through the dRShTi of Ishvara, as per
VidyAraNya's explanation of the nRsimha-uttaratApanIya words, "ihedaM
sarvaM dRShTvA."  VidyAraNya's explanation is: iha pratyagAtmani idaM
sarvaM jagaccharIracatuShTayarUpaM dRShTvA, sRShTvA dRShTireva sRShTiH,
where it is significant that Ishvara creates by His sight. By the way, this
ties in nicely with the Saundaryalahari verse that Shri Praveenji posted.

Anand

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Anand Hudli <anandhudli at hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Shri Venkatraghavanji,
>
> >>
> 1) The drishti srishti prakriyA does not differentiate between vyAvahArika
> and prAtibhAsika satya.
> 2) Thus shukti also must have some ajnAna as its upAdAna kAraNa.
> 3) Because of jnAtaikasatta in DSV, the jnAna of a vastu also implies its
> existence.
> 4) Thus shukti jnAna also can be said to be the upAdAna kAraNa of shukti.
> 5) Therefore ajnAna (from 2) = jnAna (from 4).
> 6) Because it would be absurd to say shukti ajnAna = shukti jnAna, or some
> unrelated object's ajnAna, say, ghaTa ajnAna = shukti jnAna, we have to
> admit the ajnAna from 2 is brahma ajnAna.
> 7) If we do that, we do differentiate between vyAvahArika vastu which has
> brahma ajnAna as its upAdAna kAraNa and prAtibhAsika which has
> brahmAtirikta ajnAna as its upAdAna kAraNa. This is contrary to 1.
>
> >>
>
> Steps 3 and 4 above are to be corrected as per DSV. It is not the case
> that jnAna of an object implies its existence, rather it is the other way
> round. If something exists (E), it must necessarily be known(K) (E->K). In
> other words, ajnAta object is not allowed to exist. (Of course, the six
> entities, jIva, Ishvara, avidyA, jIva-Isha-bheda, shuddha cit, and the
> association of cit and avidyA) are exempt from this rule.) In
> dRShTi-samakAlIna-sRShTi, dRShTi (perception, knowledge) and sRShTi
> (existence of an object) happen simultaneously. In PrakAshAnanda's
> dRShTirevasRShTi vAda, dRShTi itself is the object.
>
> There is absolutely no scope for vyAvahArika sattA in DSV, since existence
> implies its dRShTi. There cannot be objective reality. Even the bhAmati
> school which advocates DSV NJV, realizes this and admits a "kind" of
> vyavhArika sattA based on sAdRshya of the worlds created by jIvas. If you
> see a pot and I see the "same" pot, the same-ness is due to the
> *similarity* of the world created by you and the world created by me. The
> two pots are effectively different. This is a kind of pseudo-vyavAhArika
> sattA. Of course, in the DSV EJV, there is no other jIva and any objective
> reality is ruled out.
>
> Regarding shuktyavacchinna avidyA, or a tUlAvidyA corresponding to the
> shukti, being the upAdAnakAraNa of the rajatabhrama, that should work even
> in DSV. However, I have a feeling PrakAshAnanda's DSV would have a problem
> with it, because it seems (according to what I have understood) he does not
> allow any parts or division within avidyA, holding it to be One.
>
> Anand
>