[Advaita-l] Avidya is virodha or abhava-1 review and redo

[Michael Chandra Cohen]

Namaste All,

Again, this is a multipart response to Jaisankara Narayanji's 7 point/12
page challenge (linked below) to Sri Swami Satchidnandendra
Saraswati/SSSS's claim to have restored the teaching of Prasthanatraya
Bhasya of Sankaracharya from post-Sankara distortions and deviations. I can
only do this with the assistance of Chatgpt but will stand behind all
claims and citations.

obeisances, Michael Chandra

A quick review:
1. नञ ्pratyaya meaning
The core issue is whether the Sanskrit prefix नञ् (nañ) in "avidya" should
be interpreted as indicating virodha (opposition) or abhava (absence).

Jaishankar's traditional position argues that avidya is vidya-virodhi
(opposed to knowledge), citing Shankara's commentaries where he explicitly
uses the language of opposition (विरोध). This interpretation supports
viewing avidya as having some substantial reality.

SSSS's counter-position argues that jñāna-abhāva doesn't contradict virodha
terminology. Instead, it reframes the debate by distinguishing between
epistemic absence (non-apprehension/agrahaṇa) and ontological absence
(abhava padartha), arguing that Shankara's use of virodha is figurative
rather than indicating two substantial entities in conflict.

“SSSS shows repeatedly in Mūlāvidyā Nirāsa that abhāva of jñāna is only
relative, not absolute—it lasts only until true knowledge arises. Thus, the
virōdhatva is not proof of bhāvarūpa avidyā, but a pointer to the nature of
knowledge: it alone negates non-apprehension.”

SSSS explains that later schools (like Vivaraṇa) take virōdha to imply
mutual exclusion between two entities—i.e., that avidyā is a bhāva opposing
another bhāva (vidyā).

Overlooked by Chat was your misrepresentation of vakya. You quoted BGbh
2.69,

“And ignorance ceases because it is opposed to Knowledge” and somehow
contort that to:

“So dvaita-perception is not a problem but how one perceives is the
problem. So once mUlAvidyA is destroyed dvaita is seen as asat and brahman
alone is seen as sat.“

Dvaita is not the problem because there is no one to perceive! Bhasya
continues, “The last valid means of (Self-) knowledge eradicates the
possibility of the Self’s becoming a perceiver. And even as it eradicates,
it loses its own authoritativeness, in the same way as the means

of knowledge which is valid in dream becomes unauthoritative during the

waking state.”

And to add insult to injury Bhasyakara continues to clarify that it is
discriminating knowledge that is opposed to ignorance - no mulavidya
virodha anywhere in sight!

‘In the case of a man of steady wisdom in whom has arisen

discriminating knowledge…ignorance ceases because it is opposed to
Knowledge”,

Then you say,

//Further Br Up. Bh 3.3 Intro he says अनभभव्यस््तः अज्ञानम
्अभभव्यस््तलक्षणेन ज्ञानेन विरुध्यते ; - Ignorance which is
non-manifestation (covering) is opposed to Knowledge which manifests
(brings to  light). //

And the very next line: “If ignorance is said to be absence of knowledge,
or doubtful knowledge, or contrary (erroneous) knowledge—then all of that
is removed only by knowledge…”

Where is the mention of a shakti or some undefinable something? Rather,
there is ridicule in the next paragraph regarding the invention an opposing
force thinking it might be required iin addition to knowledge. What is
bhavarupa avidya  but an adrsta, intermediary force

“If, on the other hand, you suppose that the unseen force (adṛṣṭa) of karma
has the capacity to remove ignorance—no, because when ignorance is clearly
seen to be removed by knowledge, it is not reasonable to posit some unseen
[intermediate force]. Just as in the removal of husk from rice by pounding,
when the result (removal of husk) is evidently caused by the act of
pounding, one does not posit an unseen force (adṛṣṭa) produced by some
daily ritual like Agnihotra—so too, in the removal of ignorance, ”.
Śaṅkara explicitly calls ajñāna "anabhivyaktasthaḥ" — i.e., it is
non-manifestation or covering (āvaraṇa), which SSSS explains as agrahaṇa,
not as a reified object.
http://www.aarshavidyavarshini.org/downloads/AvidyaIsJnanaVirOdhi.pdf