48 files from the teaching of Sudhanshu Shekarji

[Michael Chandra Cohen]

Topics:

• Vedon ka swatah pramanya.pdf

• a-comparative-analysis-of-dsv-and-sdv.pdf

• a-conceptual-analysis-of-deep-sleep.pdf

• a-conceptual-understanding-of-vishishta-vaishishtya-avagahi-jnana.pdf

• a-practical-guide-of-arthapatti-pramana.pdf

• abhinna-nimitta-upadana-karanatva-of-brahman.pdf

• adhyasa-and-its-types.pdf

• ajnana-and-its-subduing.pdf

• ajnana-in-sushupti-as-per-naishkarmya-siddhi-1.pdf

• anumana-pramana-in-bhavarupa-ajnana.pdf

• ashraya-of-avidya.pdf

• basic-concepts-of-anumana-pramana.pdf

• charama-vritti.pdf

• concept-of-abhava.pdf

• concept-of-prak-abhava-in-advaita-vedanta.pdf

• drishti-srishti-vada.pdf

• eka-satta-vada-vis-a-vis-satta-traividhya-vada.pdf

• heart-of-shri-shankara-section-26.pdf

• jnna-nivartyatva-anyatha-anupapatti.pdf

• karya-karana-bhava-mithyatvam.pdf

• lakshanas-of-avidya.pdf

• mithyatva-of-mithyatva-1.pdf

• nama-rupa-and-nama-rupa-bija-1.pdf

• navya-nyaya.pdf

• paingala-upanishat.pdf

• pnachapadika-.pdf

• pnachapadikaprasthanam-section-8-9-.pdf

• rejection-of-karana-tva-as-per-khandana-khanda-khadya-1.pdf

• sakshi-and-brahman.pdf

• sakshi-and-pramata-1.pdf

• samanadhikaranya-in-mahavakyas.pdf

• saraswati-rahasya-upanishad-1.pdf

• shvetashvatara-upanishad-4.5.pdf

• swaprakashatva-of-brahman.pdf

• swarupa-negation-of-illusory-silver.pdf

• the-apparent-existence-of-ajnana.pdf

• the-concept-of-atyanta-abhava.pdf

• the-concept-of-avachchhedaka.pdf

• the-dharmas-of-nirdharmaka-brahman.pdf

• the-role-of-antah-karana-vritti-in-vishaya-pratyaksha.pdf

• the-sakshi-pratyaksha-of-bhavarupa-ajnana.pdf

• the-simile-of-chariot.pdf

• the-ultimate-viewpoint.pdf

• theory-of-pratibimba.pdf

• upadesha-sahasri-18.43.pdf

• vishaya-of-avidya.pdf

• what-is-darkness.pdf

• Vedon ka swatah pramanya.pdf

https://archive.org/details/advaita-vedanta_202509/Vedon%20ka%20swatah%20pramanya/page/n1/mode/2up

[Vikram Jagannathan]

Very nice collection! Thank you Sudhanshu ji for sharing your thoughts & teachings; and Michael ji for sharing the link!

prostrations,

Vikram

 

--
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+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAAz9PvEAgQbC5VYb2akivvxy9Qh0GFBQimJfCNT8F66Cp8rB5A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Vikram ji and Michael ji.

The write-ups are basically intended for my own clarity rather than being a "teaching". These are written centred on my own self. So, I am really not sure as to how much help it can be of others. 

It does not matter either.

Regards.

Sudhanshu Shekhar.

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Sudhanshu Shekhar <sudhans...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Oct 2, 2025 at 8:59 PM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] 48 files from the teaching of Sudhanshu Shekarji
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org>

Namaste Michael ji.

1. The creation is simultaneous. Dṛṣṭi, i.e. vṛtti-upahita-caitanya itself is sṛṣṭi. There is no concept of pañca-mahābhūta and pañcīkaraṇa etc. 

 

What is this upahita? If it functions to conceal, what is the nature of its concealment? Is it a material or like a cloud, or darkness, or error?

There are two types of drishTi-srishTi. One wherein drishTi itself is srishTi and other where srishTi and drishTi are for the same duration. VedAnta SiddhAnta MuktavalI prefers the first one, Advaita Siddhi prefers the second one.

The word upahita is understood in several senses depending on the context. In DSV, vritti is basically a modification of avidyA, which is always associated with chaitanya (because avidyA itself is associated with chaitanya), appears as knowledge.

Regarding avidyA, I would not say that it is like cloud, darkness etc. I would negatively define it. I would say that it is neither like horns of hare, nor like the four abhAvAs, nor like Brahman, nor like fog, cloud or darkness. 

It is stated to be like fog, cloud and darkness only to show that it covers and is hence not an abhAva. We should not literally assume avidyA to be like fog following Rigveda 10.82.7. This is because avidyA is bhAva-abhAva-vilakshaNa.

With respect to upahita, I feel I explained it. DrishTi is vritti-upahita-chaitanya which means drishTi is vritti, i.e. modification of avidyA which qualifies chaitanya, leading to knowledge. 

So, table-drishTi is basically that modification of avidyA which qualifies chaitanya leading to table-knowledge. 

2. Pratyabhijñā is illusory. The Devadatta seen now is not the Devadatta seen a moment ago. It is a new dṛṣṭi, it is a new Devadatta.

 

1. “Another counter-argument made by Vyāsatīrtha on DS is that this doctrine cannot establish recognition. Whether recognition is a validmeans of knowledge or is not within the domain of valid means continues to be an issue in the ongoing debate in classical Indian philosophy. The process of recognition depends upon two aspects: one is mental and the other is sensory. When it is established that ‘this is that very Devadatta’  then there exists the possibility that one Devadatta is in memory and another Devadatta is being directly perceived. Vyāsatīrtha points out that there will never be such knowledge if knowledge differs in each moment.

Not interested in what Vyasatirtha has to say.

 

Madhusūdana replies to this problem with an illustration of the recognition of a flame, which is different in each moment. This reply definitely aligns his argument closely with the Buddhist doctrine of momentariness. In this sense, the charge of Vyāsatīrtha that DS appropriates the Sautrāntika doctrine of momentariness seems to have some validity.”

As far as I know, Buddhists hold momentary creation. However, what a moment is pretty difficult to appreciate. If you apply mind on it, you will be unable to make any sense of it. Because it slips the moment you try to hold it. You cannot posit any activity in a moment. An activity needs two snapshots of time. In one moment, nothing can happen.

So, Buddhist theory of momentary creation is meaningless and is not what DSV proposes.

Here, we talk about a vritti which stretches for a period of time. In one moment, there cannot be a vritti. A vritti requires at least two moments. And as long as that vritti lasts, there is knowledge of a vishaya. And in that duration, there is creation.

So, the difference between Buddhism and DSV is obvious. However, there is a similarity in so far as rejection of external objects is concerned. That is upheld by GauDapAda also in MANDUkya. Please check 4.28. A snapshot is enclosed which shows where DSV concurs with Buddishm and where it differs.

 

  2. The consequence Vyāsatīrtha had shown in the svarūpalakṣaṇa of Brahman was re-established in AS. Namely, when we say ‘this is silver’, there are two parts: one part is ‘this’, and the other is ‘silver’. In the context of error, the ‘this’ part is the foundation of the cognition as ‘silver’, and it is the ‘silver’ that is falsely perceived, not ‘this’ part. This is the common Nyāya theory of error accepted even by Bhāṭṭa-Mīmāṃsakas. Vanamālin states that if the part ‘this’ is to be real, then there is also ‘the property of being perceived’ (dṛśyatva). To accept any object as perceived constitutes a fallacy, following DS.
 

 

3.  He further adds that, in the moment when there is a conception that ‘this is silver,’ no shell exists, along the lines of DS (since only ‘that which is known’ exists). It is therefore not possible to state that superimposition is due to ignorance of that i.e., shellhood, for instance.

What is the doubt? These are all addressed in detail.

 

3. Bhāvarūpa avidyā is admitted. You say somewhere, “the swarUpa lakshaNa of adhyAsa i.e. appearance of non-difference of mithyA vastu with satya vastu, is not possible”

 

How can mithyA be a vastu when you hold silver is sublatable and that whatever is seen exists?

What do you mean by vastu?

 

4. There is only one jīva.
What is the nature of this jiva? Empirical, Brhaspati, Eshwara, Sakshi, Pure Consciousness? Reconcile that jiva is anadi but has an end.

jIva is defined as avidyA-pratibimbita-chaitanya. Shankara also has stated so that jIva is a pratibimba. Now where this reflection happens is the question. SDV has different media. Samkshepa Shariraka would hold that it is buddhi. VivaraNa would hold that it is antah-karaNa-tat-samskAra-avachchhinna-ajnAna. 

DSV holds avidyA to be the reflecting medium.

5. There is no ajñāta-sattā of objects.

 

“Sublatory knowledge is considered to be false. The problem arises: how can one false knowledge be more reliable than another when the knowledge of x sublates the knowledge of y? This problem raised by Vyāsatīrtha appears to be the most difficult one for Madhusūdana to resolve. Although Madhusūdana does not defend the taṭastha type of definition, pointing out that this is for those who possess a lower aptitude for realization, he defends the second, or svarūpa type of definition, wherein the appearance of a real thing is in the false form. If pure ‘consciousness only’, free from modification, is accepted as the doctrine of DS, there is no necessity for defending this position. As Madhusūdana defends another version of DS, in which all is only false appearance, then in this case, his defense of the svarūpa definition fits.”

Again, what is the doubt?

Michael ji. Let us not make DSV complicated. It is the simplest possible theory and is vetted by our experience. We don't need to learn any big jargon or vocabulary to understand DSV. We have to merely appreciate - this waking world is a dream. In all respects. In every respect. Now whatever conclusions follow, we have to be ready to accept.

Leave everything aside, what Shankara says, what SSSS ji says, what VivaraNa says, what MS says. Can we show an iota of difference between waking and dream? Can we cite even one parameter based whereupon I can distinguish dream from waking?

I need not know any ShAstra to appreciate that I cannot find any difference. I am not asking you to answer it. I am asking you to analyse dispassionately!!

Regards.

Sudhanshu Shekhar.

--

Commissioner of Income-tax,
Delhi.

sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com

[Michael Chandra Cohen]

Namaste Sudhanshuji, 

I'm picking and choosing responses just to keep it simple. 

//Regarding avidyA, I would not say that it is like cloud, darkness etc. I would negatively define it. I would say that it is neither like horns of hare, nor like the four abhAvAs, nor like Brahman, nor like fog, cloud or darkness. With respect to upahita, I feel I explained it. DrishTi is vritti-upahita-chaitanya which means drishTi is vritti, i.e. modification of avidyA which qualifies chaitanya, leading to knowledge.

It is stated to be like fog, cloud and darkness only to show that it covers and is hence not an abhAva. We should not literally assume avidyA to be like fog following Rigveda 10.82.7. This is because avidyA is bhAva-abhAva-vilakshaNa//

--You say it is not like this and that but still give it a positive existential status by saying it covers but is not simply a mistaken notion that covers. So mulavidya has a presence, dynamically functions and is subject to destruction yet is indeterminable as existence. Surely, if it were non-existent it couldn't function or be destroyed. Does the term BAV appear in PTB? 

//2. Pratyabhijñā is illusory. The Devadatta seen now is not the Devadatta seen a moment ago. It is a new dṛṣṭi, it is a new Devadatta//

--What then accounts for memory to recognize the difference between past and present? There must be some connection/basis that remains and is not subject to time and change. Madhusudhana's flame example doesn't seem to resolve the conundrum. 

//Here, we talk about a vritti which stretches for a period of time. In one moment, there cannot be a vritti. A vritti requires at least two moments. And as long as that vritti lasts, there is knowledge of a vishaya. And in that duration, there is creation.//

--Interesting. So vritti is in time rather than time as vritti? Is there ever time without a vritti? Isn't creation a vritti in time? 

// Let us not make DSV complicated.// 

--There is nothing simple about DSV - it is thoroughly anti-intuitive, requiring deconstruction of our most deeply seated afflictions and is filled with intellectual traps. Advaita Siddhi depicts and refutes 9 definitions of empirical reality, classifies 6 anadi entities, and comprises 2 dense volumes defending DSV against Dualist attack.  Nothing simple about sadhana and siddhanta only appears simple

//Leave everything aside, what Shankara says, what SSSS ji says, what VivaraNa says, what MS says. Can we show an iota of difference between waking and dream? Can we cite even one parameter based whereupon I can distinguish dream from waking?//

-- Very nice! This is the argument we need to have with ourselves over and over again. 

Warm Regards 🙏🙏🙏

--

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+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAH9%3D%2BBC1vDtR4%2BxiU4V2s9L97fmVLP%3D5Xrbr3Qxxm_dN_GQd0Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

Sudhanshi-ji: Leave everything aside, what Shankara says, what SSSS ji says, what VivaraNa says, what MS says. Can we show an iota of difference between waking and dream? Can we cite even one parameter based whereupon I can distinguish dream from waking?

 

Michael-ji: Very nice! This is the argument we need to have with ourselves over and over again. 

 

Dennis: Presumably neither of you has ever had a lucid dream. You recognize, in the dream, that you are dreaming and are able subsequently to direct the development of the dream. You actually choose ‘where to go’ and ‘what to do’. You are limited only by your imagination. Flying unaided is a popular one. (I have only had lucid dreams a handful of times but experienced this one.)

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Dennis ji.

Dennis: Presumably neither of you has ever had a lucid dream. You recognize, in the dream, that you are dreaming and are able subsequently to direct the development of the dream. You actually choose ‘where to go’ and ‘what to do’. You are limited only by your imagination. Flying unaided is a popular one. (I have only had lucid dreams a handful of times but experienced this one.)

You can dream that you are lucid dreaming. There is no need to posit lucid dream as a separate or novel experience. It is a dream.

Whichever state has a seen, that state is a dream. 

Regards.

Sudhanshu Shekhar.

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

As I said, clearly you have not yourself experienced a lucid dream. You would not try to argue in this way if you had.

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of Sudhanshu Shekhar
Sent: Saturday, October 4, 2025 8:29 AM
To: Advaitin <adva...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] 48 files from the teaching of Sudhanshu Shekarji

 

Namaste Dennis ji.

--

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+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAH9%3D%2BBCvh8u91%2BzgMcoWbuoMRx%2BQbYA0tXstd8OzqCWE81XfPw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ananta Chaitanya [Sarasvati]]

Namaste Sudhanshuji,

On Thu, Oct 2, 2025 at 9:00 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar <sudhans...@gmail.com> wrote:

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Sudhanshu Shekhar <sudhans...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Oct 2, 2025 at 8:59 PM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] 48 files from the teaching of Sudhanshu Shekarji
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org>

Leave everything aside, what Shankara says, what SSSS ji says, what VivaraNa says, what MS says. Can we show an iota of difference between waking and dream? Can we cite even one parameter based whereupon I can distinguish dream from waking?

Undoubtedly so. Unfortunately, even those who consider anubhava as not only a pramANa, but a primary one, jump to Shruti when this analysis is suggested based on anubhava!

Kind rgds,

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