[Advaita-l] Can a mithyA-vastu produce an effect? असत्यवस्तुनः अर्थक्रियाकारित्वम्
v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Wed May 25 03:35:55 CDT 2011
2011/5/23 Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com>
> The dream woman will be true only according to Sribhashya.
There can't be a greater proof for the fact that the dream is the jiva's
imagination than the test: upon waking if the 'other' members of the dream
are consulted for testifying the dream event, none would.
> God only
> creates all dream objects for every Jeeva according to Papa and Punya.
> That Jeeva experiences the dream objects created for him.
> स्वप्ने च प्राणिनां पुण्यपापानुगुणं भगवतैव तत्तत्पुरुषमात्रानुभाव्याः
> तत्तत्कालावसानाः तथाभूताश्च अर्थाः सृज्यन्ते ।
> He is referring Bruhadaranyaka Sruti Na Tatra Rathaha to prove God
> creates the dream things. The Jeeva cannot create them because he has
> is bound in Samsara.
> There is no way to prove dream objects are false.
Advaita is not against the vasana theory. Gaudapada has proved the falsity
of dream objects thru several yuktis. Being bound in samsara is a boon for
creation. The jiva, owing to avidya > kAma > karma produces enough inputs
for Ishwara to create the bhoga/bhogya vastu not just for himself but for
others also. In the recent past I have posted verses from the Bhagavatam on
the topic of dream, dream objects and their unreality. This only
corroborates the Advaitic interpretation of the 'na tatra rathaaH' of the
> The dream woman is real. The union of man and dream woman is real.
> Recently there was one case. The wife went for divorce because husband
> was doing bad things online. You cannot argue the husband was innocent
> because woman on screen is Mithya and the union with her was Mithya.
Here the case is one with the perverted behaviour of the man.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list