Sri SSS Discussions

A few responses to various post below:

Sri Anand Hudli wrote:“Agreed, the three states of sleep, dream, and waking are themselves
superimpositions, but then, why would a principal upaniShad be devoted to description of the three
states, if we are able to brush them aside
so easily?”

Namaste, thank you for the reference in SLS. Can you provide any other references that explicitly state
that any prior agrahaNa is only an implication of thought, and not a prior state and without a temporal
relationship with adhyAsa?

 With reference to the above point you make, I think you and others have already provided the answer to this
question. As Shankara says, “avidyA-kalpita-bheda-nivritti-paratvAt shAstrasya”.
Shastra’s function is to remove the distinctions imagined by Avidya. The method as we know is
adhyaropa-apavAda.  The description of the 3 states is a method par excellence to point out the
superimposed nature of these states and then rescind them. This is definitely no waste of time as it helps a
qualified seeker understand what Atman is not. 

Shastra as niSedha shastram is given clearly in BUBV 2.3.187
niSedhyAnAm asheSANAm anyonya-vyabhichAratah 
pratIcho-vyabhichAor’tah tatrAdhyastam niSidhyate [BUBV2.3.187]
As all objects that are denied are mutually related, and there is unfailing exisitence of the inner self,
All that is superimposed is denied.
With regards superimposition, Shankara’s definition is sufficient “sarvathApi tu anyasya
anyadharmAvabhAsatAm na vyabhicharati” to describe adhyAsa

Sri Rajaram Venkatramani wrote:“Madhusudana proves existence of avidya in three states using
pratyaksha, anumana, arthapatti and sabda. He also reconciles vivarana and vartika views. Whatever you
do, theories about avidya will abound because it is its verynature - indeterminate. And Sri Anand Hudli