[Advaita-l] (no subject)

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste Chandramouliji,

I'm just a little lost on some of what you said, clubbing them together
below:

On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:27 PM, H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Just wanted to clarify my earlier statement. Sri Mani Dravid Shastrigal
> did not mention mAyA or avidyA. They are just my question.
>

​I'm assuming that your reference to what Shastriji says was about the crux
of Kena being that chaitanya itself gets the upAdhi name. Even if we take
it that way, we can't say chaitanya itself gets the name Maya/ avidyA and
hence such phrases cannot be used for them.


> In some contexts, when it is declared mAyA/avidya or jIva for that matter
>> is the cause of srishti, (cannot give references readily for this), does it
>> not mean the same way?
>>
> In the same way as ​shrotrasya shrotram? I do not think so. You may be
able to do so only with the first part of Shastriji's explanation in that "Any
upAdhi is active due to its association with Chaitanyam alone" but not and
Chaitanyam gets the name of the upAdhi itself in that context." since
chaitanya is surely what helps shrotra, etc, as well as Maya/ avidyA act,
but chaitanya itself can be called as shrotra, etc, with the upAdhi, but
not Maya/ avidyA with the upAdhi. The reason is that shrotra, etc, are
upAdhis due to Maya/ avidyA.

Moreover, I try to maintain that whenever mAya or avidyA are talked of as
the cause of the world, it is with chaitanya as adhiShTAna, but when jIva
is talked of as the cause of the world, it is with mAya/ avidyA as upAdhi;
the exact other way around, since jIvobrahmaiva nAparaH.

​gurupAdukAbhyAm
,
--Praveen R. Bhat
/* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
That owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
​