[Advaita-l] Debunking Drishti-Srishti Vada and Eka Jiva Vada - part 1

V Subrahmanian v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Sat Jul 15 00:54:02 EDT 2017

On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 12:38 AM, Aditya Kumar via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Praveen Bhatji,
> I did. I went through the emails exchanged on this forum as well as
> others. Some people even brought Quantum physics into the picture lol. I
> understand the importance of tradition in Advaita but this purely academic.
> As a matter of fact, Advaita tradition considers Vachaspati Misra as a
> stalwart in the lineage. Even he advocates aneka-jiva vada.
> I understand the fact, Vedanta is very esoteric. Notwithstanding any
> scholar's reputation, should we not give merit to the arguments alone?
> Considering that prakasananda is not as popular or as respected as
> Vachaspati Misra, doesn't that make him a mere scholar in comparison?
> I request you to give me the ref to the verse that you are speaking of. I
> think the context is clear though, as prakasananda repeatedly denies maya.
> He has explicitly stated maya is tuccha. He has even stated 'like hare's
> horn'. How can anyone overlook this?
> I haven't written on the vijnanavada part yet. I actually got a copy of
> siddhanta muktavali and read it. He derives almost 99% of his thesis from
> Sunya vada and Vijnanavada. I will write about it in detail shortly.
> Briefly, Shankara says in BSB that dreams are sublated in waking state,
> the magician's magic is sublated when trick is revealed, but we never
> observe the objective world sublating in anything.

In the BSB 3.2.21 Shankara says:

अथ अविद्याध्यस्तो ब्रह्मण्येकस्मिन् अयं प्रपञ्चो विद्यया प्रविलाप्यत इति
ब्रूयात् , ततो ब्रह्मैव अविद्याध्यस्तप्रपञ्चप्रत्याख्यानेन आवेदयितव्यम् —
‘एकमेवाद्वितीयं ब्रह्म’ ‘तत्सत्यꣳ स आत्मा तत्त्वमसि’ (छा. उ. ६ । ८ । ७)
— तस्मिन्नावेदिते, विद्या स्वयमेवोत्पद्यते ; तया च अविद्या बाध्यते, ततश्च
अविद्याध्यस्तः सकलोऽयं नामरूपप्रपञ्चः स्वप्नप्रपञ्चवत् प्रविलीयते —
अनावेदिते तु ब्रह्मणि ‘ब्रह्मविज्ञानं कुरु प्रपञ्चप्रविलयं च’ इति
शतकृत्वोऽप्युक्ते न ब्रह्मविज्ञानं प्रपञ्चप्रविलयो वा जायते । नन्वावेदिते
ब्रह्मणि तद्विज्ञानविषयः प्रपञ्चविलयविषयो वा नियोगः स्यात् ; न,
निष्प्रपञ्चब्रह्मात्मत्वावेदनेनैव उभयसिद्धेः — रज्जुस्वरूपप्रकाशनेनैव हि
तत्स्वरूपविज्ञानम् अविद्याध्यस्तसर्पादिप्रपञ्चप्रविलयश्च भवति ; न च कृतमेव
पुनः क्रियते ॥

The points Shankara is making are:

   - The world is superimposed in Brahman that is unitary by / due to avidya
   - Brahman alone, by negating the world, is to be realized
   - By knowing Brahman, vidya, the vrtti, arises by itself.
   - This vidya destroys avidya
   - Thereupon the entire world superimposed by avidya, resolves like a
   dream world.
   - If Brahman is not realized, instructions such as 'realize brahman,
   resolve the world', even if given out hundreds of times, will not result in
   realization or world-resolution

Thus, there is evidence in the BSB for the world resolving due to sublation
in Brahman.

You say:

In order for it to be sublated, Maya is essential which establishes the
paramartha satya. This is the unique position of Vedanta. If maya is
accepted, then objectivity of the world need not be denied. On the other
hand, whether we accept maya or not, if we assert that world is only
subjective, it needs a positive proof. No such proof or illustration can be
given. This is the same refutation against the Buddhists.


The experience of everyone that I am in a world of duality, experience
misery, etc. is itself the undeniable positive proof for the subjectivity
of the world. The illustration of the dream-world for samsara and its
resolution upon waking is given. For Buddhists there is no eternal
substratum of Consciousness upon which the subjective world is
superimposed. That is the difference.



More information about the Advaita-l mailing list