[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Atma-vichAra: Self-enquiry in daily life

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Hare Krishna,

In the book MUlAvidyA-nirAsah, SSSS ji says the following on page 153 as
his final word on Ashraya and Vishaya discussion: (
https://adhyatmaprakasha.org/php/bookreader/templates/book.php?type=sanskrit&book_id=027&pagenum=1b0144#page/200/mode/1up
)



*व्यावहारिकदृष्ट्यैवाविद्यातदाश्रयादिचिन्ता तदेवं यदा वराक्यविद्यापि
स्वरूपेण न सिध्यति तदा कैव कथा तदाश्रयविषययोः ? तथापि व्यावहारिकदृष्ट्या
सम्भवत्येव सर्वोऽप्ययं विचारः | यदा खलु
विचारात्प्राग्यथाप्रसिद्धात्मनानात्मविभागः स्वीक्रियते तदानीमविद्या विद्यत
एवात्मानात्मनोर्मिथः सम्बन्धारोपणरूपा । विद्यत एव चाविद्यागृहीतो मायात्मा
चिदाभासो ज्ञानाज्ञानोभयाश्रयः । यमेव चाश्रित्याविद्याविषय इव
भवत्यात्मेत्यवोचाम । तस्मादविद्ययात्मत्वेन गृहीत आत्माभासोऽध्यासाश्रयो
विषयश्चेति व्यवहार इत्यलं पल्लवितेन ||*

*The discussion of Ashraya and Vishaya is valid only in avidyA-drishTi. *

*Thus, (as discussed in previous sections), when this unfortunate avidyA is
not even established per se (in its swarUpa), then where can be the
occasion of a discussion on its Ashraya and vishaya? Still, from
vyAvahArika-drishTi, the discussion of Ashraya and vishaya of avidyA is
possible. Just as the well-known Atma-anAtma-vibhAga is accepted before
enquiry, at that time, indeed the avidyA is present in the form of
superimposition of relationship between AtmA and anAtmA. And is also
present the MAyAtmA i.e. chit-AbhAsa which is perceived due to avidyA as
the Ashraya of both jnAna and ajnAna. It was already said that by accepting
that (chit-AbhAsa), AtmA becomes the vishaya-of-avidyA. Therefore,
AtmA-AbhAsa, which is perceived as AtmA due to avidyA, is the Ashraya of
adhyAsa and vishaya in vyavahAra. *

Thus, it is clear that for SSSS ji, the Ashraya and vishaya of ajnAna is
chit-AbhAsa.

The question is* - *this AbhAsa of chit is where?

1. If in buddhi, then buddhi being ajnAna-prasUtah (born of ajnAna), is not
available as a reflecting medium.

2. If in ajnAna, then ajnAna needs itself as Ashraya. That is
AtmAshraya-dOsha.

Thus, SSSS ji postulating ChidAbhAsa, misunderstood as AtmA, as the Ashraya
and vishaya is incorrect.

Also, chidAbhAsa is never the vishaya-of-ajnAna. Otherwise,
chidAbhAsa-jnAna would have resulted in mukti. It is shuddha-Atma-jnAna
which results in mukti.

To aver that chidAbhAsa is Ashraya and vishaya of ajnAna by SSSS ji is
logically incorrect and contradicted by bhAshya which holds that
Brahma-jnAna is the cause of mukti. [Also, there is a clear
self-contradiction vis-a-vis his explanation in Naishkarmya Siddhi]

Regards.
Sudhanshu Shekhar.




On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 3:28 PM 'Bhaskar YR' via advaitin <
advaitin at googlegroups.com> wrote:

> praNAms
>
> Hare Krishna
>
>
>
> So, it naturally means that AtmA-without-a-tinge-of-anAtmA is the Ashraya
> and vishaya of ajnAna. It is so clear. This is what is shuddha-chaitanya,
> which is also stated as nirvibhAga-chit.
>
>
>
> Ø     If the nirvibhAga Shuddha Chaitanya / para brahman is meant here
> then how can it be possible to bifurcate the Atma and anAtma ??  do you
> mean to say in the Shuddha Chaitanya too there is AtmAnAtma vibhAga and
> pushing aside anAtma as avidyAkruta by shuddha Atman considering itself as
> AshrayadAta and giving the shelter to avidyA which is the cause for the
> anAtma !!??  BTW, what is the anAtma that is aloof from Shuddha Atma??
>
>
>
> I don't understand how can anything else be read in plain and simple words
> of NS.
>
>
>
>    - I said somany times how contextually here Atman / ChaitanyaM needs
>    to be understood based on the bhAshyakAra’s clarification in chAndOgya
>    about plain usage of the word ‘Atman’ without any prefixes and suffixes.
>    Anyway, here it is again, like the word cow etc, the word Atman without any
>    prefix refers only to pratyagAtman/upAdhi parichinna Atman not to be
>    interpreted as ‘parishuddha’ nirvikAri paramArtha chaitanyaM.  In phrases
>    like Atma-anAtma viveka which has been elaborated in NS, the same rule
>    applies coz. of the simple fact in parishuddha Atman there is no vyavahAra
>    called AtmAnAtma viveka. So, the literal meaning of Atman without a prefix
>    cannot be referred to the shuddhAtman at the best it can be referred to
>    jeevaatma only (though in shAstra’s language this jeevAtma is nothing but
>    paramAtma) due to his association and identification with upAdhi.  In the
>    Shuddha, paripUrNa Chaitanya / Atman which is being sarvAtman there is
>    nothing that can be characterized as anAtma.  You are the die hard fan of
>    logic ready to question the astitva of Acharya-Ishwara and trying to
>    establish the truth through mere logic without any sentiments/feelings
>    toward shruti/shAstra, don’t you understand this simple contextual meaning
>    of Atman here??  What are you going to do with this Atman that which you
>    are striving to realize when he himself is readily and uncontionally giving
>    the shelter to the villain called avidyA ??  don’t you think your hero
>    himself become villain here 😊
>
>
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>
> bhaskar
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "advaitin" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB662561FE30D6FDE24D9A97D08489A%40AM7PR06MB6625.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB662561FE30D6FDE24D9A97D08489A%40AM7PR06MB6625.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>


-- 
Commissioner of Income-tax,
Delhi.

sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com