Argument
IPVV — V2-S ARGUMENT MAP (the close of the jñānādhikāra: the knowers' unity and the great-Lordship, kārikās 10–11)
MACHINE_DRAFT · 2 premises
Question. The jñānādhikāra — the whole first adhikāra of the IPVV — closes. Its final point: the *unity of the knowers* (aikya). It was said "the one maheśvara." Kārikā 10 establishes the unity: without it, the world-path of the consciousnesses would not be; from the manifestation-unity, that one-ness; that one alone is the knower, it is established. Kārikā 11 summarizes the great-Lordship: he alone, by the fixed reflexive-awareness-ness, is the great Lord; the reflexive-awareness alone, of the God, in the pure knowledge-action, since. The jñānādhikāra is COMPLETE (the ||8|| colophon and the samāpta-jñānādhikāra).
Issue. **The question:** The jñānādhikāra — the whole first adhikāra of the IPVV — closes. Its final point:
the *unity of the knowers* (aikya). It was said "the one maheśvara." Kārikā 10 establishes the unity:
without it, the world-path of the consciousnesses would not be; from the manifestation-unity, that
one-ness; that one alone is the knower, it is established. Kārikā 11 summarizes the great-Lordship: he
alone, by the fixed reflexive-awareness-ness, is the great Lord; the reflexive-awareness alone, of the
God, in the pure knowledge-action, since. The jñānādhikāra is COMPLETE (the ||8|| colophon and the
samāpta-jñānādhikāra).
Premises
Kārikā 10 — the unity of the knowers
It was said "the one maheśvara." The unity is concluded: "Without that unity, the world-path of the
consciousnesses would not be; from the manifestation-unity, that one-ness, that one alone is the
knower, it is established." Hence: without the unity of the cognitions, the whole dealing (the
world-path) would not be; and it is — so the unity of the consciousnesses is necessary. Nor is it hard:
the manifestation (prakāśa) is the consciousnesses' param-essence, and it is one (no difference); and
that one is, in truth, the knower. The vṛtti's "paramātma" says the param-essence knower-ness. The
Ajaḍapramātṛsiddhi 20 ("yadyapy arthasthitiḥ…"). The 'ākārataḥ' (by the form) — the chief difference
does not exist (the own-form-grasping). The reason: the consciousness-mere-form-ness. The space-time
d
Kārikā 11 — the great-Lordship summary
The Sāṃkhya's objection: "the puruṣa's sattva-rajas-operation-form knowledge-action, in the
buddhi-tattva, are dealt as 'I'" — what new procedure is this? None: the puruṣa is not another; it is
the un-recognition of the own-lordship, the contracted-consciousness-distinct; its knowledge-action,
that "I"-recollection. (This is expanded in 4.1.3.) The vṛtti's "anūditam" (re-stated) — as the
wall-like (the bhitti), not as the "where there is smoke" rule. Hence the ahaṃ-vimarśana is the pervader
of the pure/mixed/un-pure states, as the wall-like. The 'eva' (like "the fire, the smoky"). The
threefold ahaṃ-vimarśana (by the pure-etc. difference) — the three other states (the āgama-established,
the para-vyāmiśra, the apara) are not abandoned but gathered ("etā eva ca"). (The 3.1.5 will be said.)
T
Unresolved. 1. The Ajaḍapramātṛsiddhi 20 and 1.2.7 citations — cited; the applications preserved.
2. The "bhittikalpa" (the wall-like) vs. the "where there is smoke" — the anuvāda distinction; kept.
Tension: PUSHING-IPVV-narrated
Referenced by essays (5)
Strength: MACHINE_DRAFT · Status: MACHINE_DRAFT · packet JSON
Sources & corrections: edit source →. packet lives here.