SwaprakAshatva of Brahman

To read the article in PDF, click here.

Brahman is swaprakAsha. Now, what exactly is swaprakAshatva? It is defined as अवेद्यत्वे सति अपरोक्षव्यवहार-विषयत्व-योग्यत्व-अत्यन्ताभाव-अनधिकरणत्वम्. Here, each and every word is crucial to understand. This lakshaNa is the swarUpa-lakshaNa because it is the very swarUpa of Brahman.

अवेद्यत्व

अवेद्यत्व stands for फल-अव्याप्यत्व. vyApyatva stands for vishayatva. Vishayatva stands for certain swarUpa-sambandha (स्वरूप-सम्बन्ध-विशेष). Laghuchandrika (New ed, pg 41) defines vishayatva as विषयता हि विषयेषु ज्ञानस्य तादम्यम्. Thus, fala-vyApyatva means fala-vishayatva. 

Basic concepts of Logic

vyApaka-vyApya

When it is said, A-vyApyah B i.e. B A-vyApyah, then A is vyApaka and B is vyApya. Thus, it is vahni-vyApyo dhUmah i.e. dhUmo vahni-vyApyah. Wherever there is vyApya, there has to be vyApaka there. Wherever there is smoke, there has to be fire there.

Similarly, when it said, C-vyApakah D i.e. D C-vyApakah, then it means D is vyApaka and C is vyApya. Thus, the correct usage will be dhUma-vyApako vahnih i.e. vahnih dhUma-vyApakah.

So, in the example, प्रपञ्चं मिथ्या, दृश्यत्वात्, शक्ति रुप्यवत्, the vyApya is drishyatva and vyApaka is mithyAtva. Thus, the usage will be — drishyatva-vyApakam mithyAtvam or mithyAtvam drishyatva-vyApakam. Alternatively, it can be said mithyAtva-vyApyam drishyatvam i.e. drishyatvam mithyAtva-vyApyam.   

vyApya is also called hetu or sAdhana. vyApaka is also called sAdhya. Hetu is also called anumApaka of sAdhya.

When it is said A-vyApta-B, then it means that A is vyApaka and B is vyApya. Basically vyApya is vyApta by vyApaka.

Why meditation?

Is the goal of meditation attainment of Moksha i.e. the removal of avidyA? Or the revelation of our AnandaswarUpa which is hidden by avidyA? Should we practice meditation with a desire for either of these and verify our status after mediation so as to find out whether we are progressing or not?

Or meditation is for purification of mind or making mind one-pointed so that I remain unaffected by the pulls and pushes of mind and revel in my true swarUpa which is beyond mind?

Why exactly should I do meditation?

In my understanding, desire is contradictory to meditation. We need to understand as to what exactly is meditation. It basically means non-situation as thought. Because thoughts are illusory. Entire seen is thought whereas I am the seer. Seen is illusory, on account of being seen, like snake in a rope. On the other hand, seer is non-thought and permanent whereas seen in thought and illusory. Once it is understood, it is logically inevitable for any sane person to give up thought completely and situate as non-thought. Once we understand a mirage as mirage, indifference thereto follows logically and also experientially. We no longer remain interested in it. We ignore it completely and just plainly turn away.

And this non-situation as thought cannot be with a desire or an aim for anything. Desire presumes incompleteness and duality. When seen i.e. thought is understood to be illusory and hence non-existent, duality ceases and hence desire becomes impossible. If it is argued that desire can still subsist with non-existent perceptible avidyA, it is replied that understanding of the illusoriness of avidyA will lead to indifference thereto which will negate desire like in the case of mirage.

Therefore, meditation cannot be with any desire whatsoever. What happens through meditation is irrelevant. Whether avidyA, which is the cause of seen, is removed or remains unremoved, whether my AnandaswarUpa manifests or remains hidden is irrelevant. Whether avidyA continues to be perceived or ceases to be perceived is irrelevant. It does not matter whether mirage water is seen or is not seen. Once we understand that it is mirage, it logically and experientially follows that one becomes completely indifferent to it.

Situating as non-thought is demand of sanity, demand of logic.

Thus, meditation is an end in itself and is not a means to anything.

LakshaNAs of avidyA

To read the post in PDF, click here.

ChitsukhAchArya states the lakshaNAs of avidyA as under:-

अनादिभावरूपं यद्विज्ञानेन विलीयते । तदज्ञानमिति प्राज्ञा लक्षणं संप्रचक्षते ॥

This implies — the avidyA is beginningless, bhAvarUpa and is jnAna-nivartya i.e. sublatable by knowledge.

jnAna-nivartyatva-anyathA-anupapatti

To read the article with proper formatting and schematic diagram in PDF, please click here.

Shruti states that bondage i.e. duality, which is cause of fear, is sublatable by Atma-jnAna – “तरति शोकमात्मवित्” “तथा विद्वान्नामरूपाद्विमुक्तः” “भिद्यते हृदयग्रन्थिश्छिद्यन्ते सर्वसंशयाः। क्षीयन्ते चास्य कर्माणि तस्मिन् दृष्टे परावरे ॥”. The fact of sublatability by jnAna is also a pramANa (arthApatti) for mithyAtva of bondage. Had bondage been satya, it would have been non-sublatable like Brahman. Since it is sublatable, it is mithyA. As per PanchapAdikA, jnAna removes only ajnAna (ज्ञानम् अज्ञानस्यैव निवर्तकम्). The removal of ajnAna also ipso facto implies removal of everything which is implied by ajnAna (vyApaka of ajnAna) or which are pariNAma of ajnAna.

Vishaya of avidyA

To read the post in PDF, click here.

1. The vishaya of avidyA, just like the Ashraya thereof, is shuddha chaitanya. This is so on account of the following:- 

(i) shuddha-chaitanya is not avidyA-kalpita and hence there cannot be anyonyAshraya-dosha. If anAtmA were to be the vishaya of avidyA, then there shall be anyonyAshraya-dosha. 

चिन्मात्रमेवाविद्याविषयः; तस्याकल्पितत्वेनान्योन्याश्रयादिदोषाप्रसक्तेः।

(ii) anAtmA is born of avidyA and hence cannot be vishaya of avidyA. Shuddha chaitanya is not born of avidyA and hence can very well be vishaya of avidyA.

(iii) anAtmA has the absence of atishaya. 

तस्मादतिशयाभावात् नाज्ञानविषयोऽनात्मेति।  

(iv) anAtmA is inert and hence is not self-illuminated. It has no prasakta-prakAsha. Shuddha chaitanya has prasakta-prakAsha and hence there can be AvaraNa-kritya in shuddha chaitanya. AvaraNa-kritya is prakAsha-pratibandhana which can only be in an entity which has prasakta-prakAsha. If the entity has no prasakta-prakAsha, there can be no AvarNa-kritya. 

स्वप्रकाशत्वेन प्रसक्तप्रकाशे तस्मिन् आवरणकृत्यसंभवात्। 

न च स्वयमेव प्रकाशहीनस्य जडस्य आवरणार्थोऽपि सम्भवति।   

(v) jnAna and ajnAna must have the same vishaya. Since ajnAna is removed by shuddha-chaitanya-vishayaka-jnAna, ajnAna must also have shuddha-chaitanya as vishaya.

Ashraya of avidyA

To read the article in PDF, click here.

1. It has been stated in samkshepa shArIraka 1.319: 

आश्रयत्वविषयत्वभागिनी निर्विभागचितिरेव केवला । पूर्वसिद्धतमसो हि पश्चिमो नाश्रयो भवति नापि गोचरः ।।

The Ashraya and vishaya of avidyA is divisionless (nirvibhAga) advitIya (kevalA) shuddha chaitanya alone. That which is subsequent to the earlier-established darkness (avidyA) can neither be the Ashraya nor the vishaya thereof.

The Ashraya of anAdi avidyA can be some anAdi entity only. That is either shuddha chaitanya, Ishwara or jIva. However, since Ishwara-jIva vyavasthA itself is caused by avidyA, they are subsequent to avidyA. Though avidyA, Ishwara and jIva are all anAdi, yet on account of Ishwara-jIva-vibhAga being avidyA-kArya, avidyA is said to be earlier-established and hence neither Ishwara nor jIva can be the Ashraya of avidyA.

Thus, the Ashraya of avidyA is shuddha chaitanya alone. 

2. Just as mirror has sambandha with mukha-mAtra i.e. shuddha-mukha i.e. mukha without bimba-tva, avidyA has sambandha with shuddha chaitanya. The same mukha becomes divided as bimba and pratibimba due to the upAdhi of the mirror. Similarly, shuddha chaitanya appears as Ishwara and jIva due to the upAdhi of avidyA. Now, because the upAdhi is pratibimba-paksha-pAtI, the features of the mirror appear in pratibimba alone and not in bimba. That is why avidyA-krita-samsAra manifests in pratibimba jIva only, and not in bimba Ishwara. दर्पणस्य मुखमात्रसंबन्धेऽपि प्रतिमुखे मालिन्यवत् प्रतिबिम्बे जीवे संसारः, न बिम्बे ब्रह्मणि; उपाधेः प्रतिविम्बपक्षपातित्वात् । 

What exactly is this pratibimba-paksha-pAtitva of upAdhi?

It means that atishaya-kArya-karatvam of upAdhi is in pratibimba alone.

What exactly is this atishaya-kArya-karatvam?

UpAdhi produces effects in both bimba and pratibimba. Thus, kArya-karatvam is common to both bimba and pratibimba. For e.g. upAdhi creates division between bimba and pratibimba. Bimba has bimbatva and pratibimba has pratibimbatva due to upAdhi. Thus, vibhAga is produced in both bimba and pratibimba. However, the features of upAdhi are specifically manifested in pratibimba alone such as colour, grossness etc. Hence, there is atishaya-kArya-karatvam of upAdhi in pratibimba alone. And hence upAdhi is called pratibimba-paksha-pAti. That is why kartritva-bhoktritva-samsAra is reflected only in pratibimba jIva but not in bimba Ishwara. 

Also, LaguchandrikAkAra accepts pratibimba-pasksha-pAtI to be उपाधे: प्रतिबिम्बं प्रति स्वविषयाच्छादकत्वम् i.e. upAdhi covers its vishaya to pratibimba alone and not to the bimba and that is called pratibimba-paksha-pAtI. Thus, avidyA covers shuddha Brahman to jIva only and not to Ishwara.

What exactly do we mean by this atishaya-kArya-karatvam? Does it mean that the number of effects produced in bimba is more than that in pratibimba? Or does it mean that the effect produced in pratibimba is somewhat different/special than that in bimba?

atishaya-kArya-karatvam basically means that the kArya produced in pratibimba is vilakshaNa to that in bimba. And that is covering-of-the-vishaya-of-upAdhi-to-pratibimba. Since this covering is only to pratibimba and not to bimba, the effect produced in pratibimba is vilakshaNa to that in bimba. This leads to atishaya-kArya-karatvam in pratibimba which implies that upAdhi is pratibimba-paksha-pAtI.

3. But how can shuddha chaitanya be the Ashraya of ajnAna? Shuddha chaitanya is prakAsha-swarUpa whereas ajnAna is like darkness.

Shuddha chaitanya is not ajnAna-virodhI but only pramANa-vritti-pratibimbita-chaitanya is ajnAna-virodhI. And it cannot be argued that then shuddha chaitanya will be inert like pot as it is non-contradictory to ajnAna. This is so because it is the same chaitanya which destroys ajnAna when it is reflected in pramANa-vritti. Here the analogy is BBV SAra 1.4.225 तृणादेर्भासिकाप्येषा सूर्यदीप्तिस्तृणं दहेत्। सूर्यकान्तमुपारुह्य तन्न्यायं चिति योजयेत्।।

4. But it is clearly grasped by the sAkshI that “I am ignorant”. This shows that Ashraya of avidyA is ahamkAra.

The Ashraya of ajnAna is shuddha chaitanya. However, there is tAdAtmya-adhyAsa of ahamkAra with shuddha chaitanya. Therefore, ajnAna which has Ashraya as shuddha chaitanya appears to have ahamkAra as Ashraya. Just as burning-hood belongs to fire. But fire has tAdAtmya-adhyAsa with an iron ball. Hence, there is the feeling — the iron ball burns.  

Thus, ahamkAra and ajnAna both have adhyAsa with the same shuddha chaitanya. Thus, both superimposed entities have sAmAnAdhikaraNya and accordingly, ajnAna appears to possess ahamkAra as Ashraya.

Further, ahamkAra is subservient to ajnAna as the latter is upAdAna of ahamkAra. Further, ahamkAra is with beginning whereas ajnAna is without a beginning. Hence, ahamkAra cannot be the Ashraya of ajnAna.

5. But Shruti says that shuddha chaitanya is niravadya (defect-less) etc. Being the Ashraya of avidyA will contradict Shruti.

Not so. Because upAdhi is pratibimba-paksha-pAtI and the defects etc will arise only in pratibimba jIva but not in Ishwara or shuddha chaitanya. Also Shvetashvatara Shruti says that MAyI is Maheshwara. Here, it should be noted that there is tAdAtmya between Maheshwaratva-upahita-chaitanya and shuddha-chaitanya. Hence, though avidyA has shuddha-chaitanya as Ashraya, it is the Maheshwara which is stated as MAyI. Maheshwara is MAyA-adhIsha whereas jIva is MAyA-niruddha. This is so because avidyA covers the chaitanya only to the jIva and not to the Ishwara.

When jIva is stated by ShvetAshvatara Shruti to be ignorant, it is not to posit the Ashraya-tva of ajnAna to jIva but to posit the ajnAna-AvaraNa of shuddha chaitanya to the jIva. 

6. But there should be sAmAnAdhikaraNya of bhrama and jnAna. Since shuddha chaitanya cannot have bhrama as bhrama must belong to jIva. Similarly, the jnAna which removes bhrama also must belong to jIva. There has to be sAmAnAdhikaraNya of ajnAna with bhrama. Hence, ajnAna must have jIva as Ashraya.

Despite ajnAna having shuddha chaitanya as Ashraya, there is sAmAnAdhikaraNya of bhrama, pramA and ajnAna. It is the shuddha chaitanya which is stated as jnAtA on account of adhyAsa with antah-karaNa. Thus, pramA belongs to pramAtA which is jIva or jnAtA as pramA is antah-karaNa-vritti. Further, in case of bhrama, the vishayAkArA anirvachanIyA avidyA-vritti arises which actually pertains to sAkshI and yet on account of tAdAtmya-adhyAsa with shuddha chaitanya appears to be bhrama of jnAtA jIva.

Thus, be it pramA or bhrama or ajnAna, they are superimposed in shuddha chaitanya either directly or indirectly i.e. either sAkshAt or through paramparA. Thus, it is the shuddha chaitanya alone which is the adhikaraNa of bhrama, pramA and ajnAna. Accordingly, sAmAnAdhikaraNya is not violated. 

Also, only that entity can be the Ashraya of ajnAna which is not dependent on ajnAna and which has prasakta-prakAshatvam. That is only shuddha chaitanya because only it has both प्रसक्तप्रकाशत्वम् as well as अज्ञानानाश्रितत्वम्। 

7. What exactly is the Ashraya of the shukti-ajnAna then? Is it also shuddha chaitanya?

What we refer to as shukti-ajnAna is actually a combination of two facets of ajnAna. First one has shukti-gata-idama-asha-avachinna-chaitanya as the Ashraya whereas the other one has ahamartha-avachchinna-chaitanya as Ashraya. Former is called abhAna-ApAdaka-ajnAna which is destroyed only by aparoksha-pramA whereas the latter is called asattva-ApAdaka-ajnAna which is destroyed by either paroksha-pramA or aparoksha-pramA. abhAna-ApAdaka-ajnAna is the upAdAna kAraNa of the superimposed-silver and also the jnAna-of-superimposed-silver.  

The asattva-ApAdaka-ajnAna has the pramAtritva-prayojaka-upAdhi-avachchhinna-chaitanya as Ashraya. Here, pramAtritva-prayojaka-upAdhi is deha-avachchhinna-vritti-mat-antah-karaNa. It is loosely stated to be ahamartha-avachchhinna-chaitanya. However, the actual definition is as given above.

8. But how can there be pratibimba of shuddha-chaitanya? 

(a) Only that entity which has rUpa can have pratibimba.

(b) It will result into beginning-ness of jIva.

(c ) There cannot be pratibimba as shuddha chaitanya and ajnAna have differential sattA just as sun does not get reflected in mirage-water.

(a) rUpa itself does not have rUpa. And yet, it has pratibimba. So, no such rule can be made. There is also the reflection of AkAsha.

(b) The upAdhi-sambandha is anAdi. Hence, this defect does not arise.

(c ) Just as redness-of-crystal, which is prAtibhAsika, is reflected in vyAvahArika-mirror, there can be reflection of shuddha chaitanya in vishama-sattAka ajnAna having differential order of reality. Chit-pratibimba is proved through Shruti. Accordingly, the requisite purity is accepted in avidyA whereas mirage-water is accepted to not possess such purity on account of non-reflection.

It cannot also not be said that avidyA having transformed to AkAsha etc cannot have pratibimba as crystal still allows reflection even if it is converted as a utensil. However, if the crystal is powdered, it does not allow reflection. Thus, avidyA having pariNAma of AkAsha etc does not imply non-reflection on account of Shruti.

9. Will there not be vyadhikaraNa of moksha and bondage? 

No. On account of the identity of avachchhedya-amsha.

10. This avidyA is swAbhAvika or aupAdhika?  If swAbhAvika, it cannot be removed. If aupAdhika, what is its upAdhi? If avidyA itself, then it will result in AtmAshraya dosha. If anything else, it will lead to anyonyAshraya dosha, chakraka dosha or anavasthA.

avidyA itself is the upAdhi as it is swa-para-nirvAhaka. It does not lead to AtmAshraya-dosha just as bheda does not lead to AtmAshraya-dosha. Bheda differentiates a pot from a cloth while residing therein. At the same time, the bheda by itself differentiates itself from the pot also. Bheda causes the knowledge – “pot is different from cloth” AND also causes the knowledge – “bheda is different from pot and cloth”. Just as there is no AtmAshraya in the case of bheda, in the case of avidyA also, there is no dosha.

Even if we accept avidyA to be swAbhAvika, if the meaning of swAbhAvika is taken either to mean “Agantuka-kAraNa-ajanyatva” or “anAditva”, then like pot-rUpa and like pot-prAk-abhAva respectively, it is still removable. 

Thus, it is clear that shuddha-chaitanya is the Ashraya of avidyA.

anumAna pramANa in bhAvarUpa ajnAna

To read the article in PDF, click here

ajnAna is sAkshi-bhAsya and hence pramANa does not operate for perception of ajnAna. We aver our ignorance spontaneously without any requirement of pramANa. However, the adjectives of ajnAna such as bhAvarUpa-tva, jnAna-nivartyatva, anAditva etc are not sAkshi-bhAsya. Accordingly, pramANa is required to know the adjectives of ajnAna.

One such adjective of ajnAna is bhAvarUpatva. It can be known through anumAna pramANa which is presented as under: –

विवादगोचरापन्नं प्रमाणज्ञानं, स्वप्रागभावव्यतिरिक्त-स्वविषयावरण-स्वनिवर्त्य-स्वदेशगत-वस्त्वन्तरपूर्वकम्, अप्रकाशितार्थप्रकाशकत्वात्, अन्धकारे प्रथमोत्पन्नप्रदीपप्रभावत्। 

Here:

the paksha is pramANa-jnAna (P); 

the hetu is aprakAshita-artha-prakAshakatva (H); 

the drishTanta is first-rays-of-lamp-lit in darkness (D); and 

the sAdhya is pre-existing object which is different from prAg-abhAva of pramANa-jnAna, cover-or of object of pramANa-jnAna, removable by pramANa-jnAna and situates in the same place where pramANa-jnAna situates (S).     

pramANa is ajnAta-jnApakam i.e. it makes known something which was hitherto unknown. It does not make a known object known. It makes an unknown object known. 

It is like D which illuminates a pot kept in a dark room. The pot was covered in darkness, it was unillumined (aprakAshita). And the D illuminates it. Thus, D possesses H. 

D also possesses S. Darkness is the pre-existing vastvantara: 

(i) which is different from the prAgabhAva of D;

(ii) which is cover-or of object of D;

(iii) which is removable by D;

(iv) which is located at the same place where D situates.

P by definition has H. 

We have thus a vyApti between H and S. We have a perfect drishTAnta in D. Therefore, by the force of anumAna, S will be in P resulting in to bhAvarUpa ajnAna.

Here, the sAdhya was carefully chosen to depict the features of ajnAna acceptable in advaita. These features are: –

(i) ajnAna is different from the prAk-abhAva of pramANa-jnAna.

(ii) ajnAna is the cover-or of the object of pramANa-jnAna.

(iii) ajnAna is removable by pramANa-jnAna.

(iv) ajnAna is located in the same place where pramANa-jnAna is located. 

Another beautiful anumAna is employed for proving the bhAvarUpatva of ajnAna.

चैत्रप्रमा, चैत्रगतप्रमाप्रागभावातिरिक्तानादिनिवर्तिका, प्रमात्वान्मैत्रप्रमावत् ; 

Here, paksha is Chaitra-pramA;

Hetu is pramAtva;

SAdhya is Chaitragata-pramA-prAk-abhAva-atirikta-anAdi-nivartakatva;

DrishTAnta is Maitra-pramA.

PramA removes ajnAna. Now, this ajnAna cannot be merely pramA-prAk-abhAva. So, the object of the instant anumAna is to show that Chaitra-pramA removes ajnAna which is NOT Chaitragata-pramA-prAk-abhAva and is anAdi. The DrishTAnta taken is of Maitra-pramA. Maitra-pramA also removes ajnAna which is different from different from the pramA-prAk-abhAva of Chaitra and is also anAdi. Thus, sAdhya is there in DrishTAnta. Hetu is obviously there in DrishTAnta as Maitra-pramA will have pramA-tva. Now, since Chaitra-pramA has pramAtva i.e. hetu, by the force of anumAna, Chaitra-pramA will also be remover of an ajnAna which is anAdi and which is different from pramA-prAk-abhAva of Chaitra.

 

The concept of avachchhedaka

To read the post in PDF, please click here.

In order to have an unambiguous communication, we need to employ the concept of avachchhedaka. To explain the concept, let us take an example. 

Let there be a wooden stick. Now, this wooden stick can act as a cause to many effects. For example, we can burn it and cook rice. That is to say, we can use it as a fuel to cook rice.

We can also use this wooden stick to make pot. We require a stick, not necessarily of wood, to make a pot. Thus, here also our wooden stick is a cause, but it is a cause on account of being a stick and not on account of being made of wood.

Thus, in case of cooking rice, wooden-stick is a cause on account of being wood whereas in case of pot, wooden-stick is a cause on account of being stick.

Now, if one merely says wooden-stick is a cause of rice or cause of pot, then the information does not clearly get communicated.

Here, the concept of avachchedaka (delimitor) comes into picture.

We would say– wooden-stick is a cause of rice wherein the causality of wooden-stick is delimited by fuel-hood. Wooden-stick is a cause of pot wherein the causality of wooden-stick is delimited by stick-hood.

Now, both fuel-hood and stick-hood are inherent in wooden-stick. And they act as delimitor in different circumstances.

In sanskrit, we would say, wooden-stick is a कारण of rice with इन्धनत्व as कारणता-अवच्छेदक. And wooden-stick is a कारण of pot with दण्डत्व as कारणता-अवच्छेदक.

It is pictorially represented as follows:   

Technically speaking, avachchhedaka is defined as follows:-

प्रकारीभूत-अन्यून-अनतिरिक्त-वृत्ति-धर्म: अवच्छेदक:

Without conveying the avachchedaka, the communication is not complete and is prone to misunderstanding. 

The concept of avachchhedaka is utilised in case of abhAva also. The pratiyogI of abhAva possesses pratiyogitA. So, in order to convey properly, we need to explain the pratiyogitA-avachchedaka. Without conveying that, the information is not correctly transferred.

For example, let us say that there is no pot in the room. So, one is justified in saying — there is no pot in the room. Here, the pratiyogI is pot and pratiyogitA-avachchhedaka is pot-ness.

Now, let us say there is a golden pot in the home which is for beauty and not for cooling water. Now, a person looking for a pot to cool water says — there is no pot in the room. This also is an acceptable statement. However, here the pratiyogitA-avachchhedaka is not pot-ness but clay-hood. Had there been a clay-pot, this statement could not have been made.

Thus, the concept of pratiyogitA-avachchedaka is crucial in unambiguous communication. 

Charama-vritti

To read the post in PDF, click here.

The English translation “Heart of Shri Shankara” says://”The doctrine of the atmakara-vrtti (or brahmakara-vrtti) as the last vrtti, coinciding with the death of the body, is reflected in the following passage at Madhusudana, A.S. Ed. Yogindrinanda p.1284-(N.S. Ed. p.88S)://

First and foremost, it is to be understood that AtmAkArA-vritti or BrahmAkArA-vritti or akhanDAkArA-vritti is not defined to occur only at the time of death of the body. It is not the siddhAnta that it will occur only at the time of death of the body.

In siddhAnta, chaitanya-reflected-in-akhanDAkArA-vritti is the destroyer of avidyA. However, this akhanDAkArA-vritti can be either coupled with prArabdha-rUpa-pratibandhaka or without prArabdha-rUpa-pratibandhaka.

prArabdha-rUpa-pratibandhaka-vishishTa-akhanDAkArA-vritti (AV1) is the general connotation of akhanDAkArA-vritti. Chaitanya-reflected-in-AV1 removes two out of three shakti of avidyA, namely shakti-which-causes-the-illusion-of-reality-in-world and shakti-which-enables-artha-kriyA-kAritva-in-world. However, chaitanya-reflected-in-AV1 is incapable of removing the third shakti of avidyA, which is also known as avidyA-lesha and is shakti-which-gives-birth-to-objects-which-are-cable-of-appearing-as-pratyaksha.

prArabdha-rUpa-pratibandhaka-rahita-akhanDAkArA-vritti (AV2) is called charma-vritti. It is also akhanDAkArA-vritti. However, since there is no pratibandhaka in the form of prArabdha, the chaitanya-reflected-in-AV2 removes even the third shakti i.e. avidyA-lesha.

Thus, the very first line in HOSS makes an error. The doctrine does not say that AtmAkArA-vritti is last vritti. The charama-vritti is also an akhanDAkAra-vritti. The special thing about it is that there is no pratibandhaka in the form of prArabdha here.

//’Nor should it be said that, since there is no superiority in point of manifestation of bliss the mental modification (vrtti) that produces the highest (parama) form of liberation (at death) over the earlier modification that produces liberation in life, it follows that the highest form of liberation is constituted, not by the pure Self, but merely by the Self as associated with the last moment of life or the last breath. For we hold that the last self-effacing mental modification is superior to the earlier one producing liberation in life in point of manifestation of bliss, because it is not affected by further mental activity (vikshepa) arising from the merit and demerit that produced the present life (prarabdha-karma), whereas the earlier modification was’.//

Thus, in contrast to Samkara’s doctrine of sadyomukti or total liberation in life, the later authors tended to regard liberation in life as a mere preliminary to liberation at the death of the body, altogether inferior to it.” HOSS fn3 p201//

First and foremost, we must understand that MadhusUdana Saraswati accepts jIvanmukti as arthavAda in the main VedAnta SiddhAnta, which is drishTi-srishTi-vAda. The relevant sections of Advaita Siddhi in DrishTi-srishTi-vAda-vichArah and Eka-jIva-vAda-vichArah may be seen. I am surprised as to why such distinction is not made upfront before attributing the “later authors” with fanciful ideas.

JIvanmukti is admitted only in SDV. It is not admitted in DSV or in ajAti.

Now, I will put up the quoted portion from Advaita-siddhi in Sanskrit:

न च जीवन्मुक्तिप्रयोजकवृत्त्यपेक्षया परममुक्तिप्रयोजकवृत्तौ आनन्दाभिव्यक्तिगतविशेषाभावे चरमक्षणेन चरमश्वासेन वा उपलक्षित आत्मा मुक्तिरिति किं न स्यादिति वाच्यम् ; प्रारब्धकर्मप्रयुक्तविक्षेपाविक्षेपाभ्यामभिव्यक्तिविशेषस्याङ्गीकारात् ।

First of all, the English translation posted in the quote is itself incorrect. As we have seen before, jIvanmukti-prayojaka-vritti is AV1 and parama-mukti-prayojaka-vritti is AV2. The objection by the opponents is:

Objection: There is absence of difference in the expression of bliss in AV1 and AV2. Therefore, why liberation should not be last-moment-upalkshitA-AtmA or last-breath-upalskhita-AtmA. {The siddhAnta is not that pure self is liberation, as HOSS holds. It is rather AV2-upalskhita-AtmA. The topic is of avidyA-nivritti which is liberation. Advaita-Siddhi holds avidyA-nivritti to be AV2-upalakshita-AtmA. HOSS incorrectly mentions “pure self”}.

Answer: No. The difference in the expression of bliss in AV1 and AV2 is admitted on account of vikshepa-caused-by-prArabdha (in case of AV1) and absence-of-vikshepa-caused-by-prArabdha (in case of AV2).

Now, jIvanmukti is verily the sadyomukti of bhAshya. The “later authors” are not treating jIvanmukti as preliminary. The AvAraNa-shakti of avidyA is destroyed and there is mere appearance of world without any illusion of reality therein. However, since prArabdha is there, the expression of bliss is subdued. The fact of difference in expression of bliss on account of sustenance of appearance of upAdhi is not at all detrimental to absence of ignorance which is the cause of illusion of reality in world.

It is trite to say that a jIvanmukta will feel pain when he is going through invasive surgery etc. The expression of bliss will certainly be subdued in comparison to Videha-mukta. This is obvious. It does not violate sadyomukti as the AvaraNa of avidyA is totally lost and there is no illusion of reality in perception.

BhAshya in fact holds that in order to exhaust prArabhda, the jnAnI will have rAga-dvesha etc as without them, prArabdha cannot be exhausted. यत्तूक्तं विपरीतप्रत्ययतत्कार्ययोश्च दर्शनादिति, न, तच्छेषस्थितिहेतुत्वात् — येन कर्मणा शरीरमारब्धं तत् , विपरीतप्रत्ययदोषनिमित्तत्वात् तस्य तथाभूतस्यैव विपरीतप्रत्ययदोषसंयुक्तस्य फलदाने सामर्थ्यमिति, यावत् शरीरपातः तावत्फलोपभोगाङ्गतया विपरीतप्रत्ययं रागादिदोषं च तावन्मात्रमाक्षिपत्येव — मुक्तेषुवत् प्रवृत्तफलत्वात् तद्धेतुकस्य कर्मणः । तेन न तस्य निवर्तिका विद्या, अविरोधात् ; किं तर्हि स्वाश्रयादेव स्वात्मविरोधि अविद्याकार्यं यदुत्पित्सु तन्निरुणद्धि, अनागतत्वात् ; अतीतं हि इतरत् ।

Thus, there in no incongruity of Advaita-Siddhi with bhAshya here.