[Advaita-l] Advaiti Response to this report?
srirudra at vsnl.com
srirudra at vsnl.com
Mon Jan 9 02:41:49 CST 2012
Mithya does not mean nonexistence.What the Acharya means by that-according to my analysis-is that the world and its phenomena as we see it are not as they are perceived and veiled by maya we give meanings and values according to our avidya which is anadhi.For e.g.can we logically say why we are like what we are-physically,mentally and functionally?.We can say anirvachaneeya.We assume and we act.Sometimes we fool ourselves knowingly and repent also.Why?This is what is called mithya.Our interpretations based on experience,instinct and what you will are not always correct.R.Krishnamoorthy.
----- Original Message -----
From: Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com>
Date: Monday, January 9, 2012 11:25 am
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Advaiti Response to this report?
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> Hare Krishna
> I think here somany wrong assumptions about advaita as a siddhAnta
> dvaitins. Which is anyway, bread & butter for their relentless
> attack on
> advaita :-))
> But they will say there is no example for neither true nor false
> thing. If
> you say Sukti Rajata is Mithya they will say it is Asat.
> > shankara gives an example of water & foam for the mAyA's
> anirvachaneeyatva. Foam which is not quite the same as water but
> yet not
> a different entity either. Likewise, mAyA too cannot be defined to
> identical with brahman or quite distinct from brahman. The analogy
> shukti-rajata is not anyway meant to prove mayA's
> However, sadasadanirvachaneeya khyAti is the (that there is some
> anirvachaneeya rajata in shukti) latest development propagated by
> shankara vyAkhyAnakAra-s.
> Nobody has a doubt is the Sukti Rajata is true or false? Everybody
> say it is false. The world is not Mithya. It may be called as
> because it can get destroyed but not Mithya.
> > nor it is satya...coz. the satya never ever undergoes any
> change. It is
> trikAla abhAditaM. When the jnAni realizes the svarUpa behind
> rUpa he would realize the fact that nAma rUpa in their svarUpa is
> only. The realization of oneness of kAraNa-kArya is quite clear
> shankara's advaita. See for the explanation and clarification in
> Like this world is getting created protected and destroyed and the
> cycle is continuing. Why should we call the world Mithya? The nature
> of the world is temporary real. But not Mithya.
> > Yes, jagat in its svarUpa is nothing but brahman..Hence we should
> see jagat as anAtma since it is in its sadrUpa none other than
> only. Shruti says those who see jagat as anAtma, they are not
> for mOksha (bruhadAraNyaka). Siddhanta here is simple that there is
> nothing exists apart from brahman. But how come this
> brahman would become jagadAkAra with multiple names and forms?? it
> just like a snake that is appeared in a rope due to avidyA. Then is
> acceptable to say that since there is no snake in the rope, there
> is no
> existence of jagat in brahman?? Not like that since there is no
> existence for snake apart from rope, jagat too, in its own svarUpa
> but brahman. (shankara clarifies in chAdOgya shruti bhAshya). And
> sUtra bhAshya too he elsewhere says that the existence is ONLY
> the effect (kArya as nAma rUpAtmaka jagat) is none other than the
> cause (
> the brahman) ekaM cha punaH satvaM, athOpyananyatvaM kAraNAt
> Severe criticism coming from them is Advaita makes the whole world
> a silly
> > which is really a silly straw man argument from dvaitins, which
> have been enjoying since centuries :-)) without realizing the
> concept of
> mithyatva from advaita perspective.
> It never happened. We are imagining this world. A person with
> hallucination talks like this.
> > Kindly ask them to study 2nd sUtra of vedAnta sUtra and shankara
> bhAshya with little bit of open mind.
> The Jiva goes through three states. But a dream object is also real.
> There is no object in dreamless sleep. How can it show world is
> > That which exists in one state (waking), looks different in
> state (dreaming) and absent in yet another state (sushupti) is not
> qualified to be called as paramArtha satya. Hence the socalled
> of jagat in strictly restricted to one particular state. And in
> that state
> also (where we attribute hard core reality to nAmarUpAtmaka jagat)
> siddhAnta insists that it is nothing but THAT. If you see the
> jagat from
> upAdhi drushti then it is paricchinna & there is nAnAtva..but if
> you see
> the jagat from the svarUpa drushti than it is nothing but
> here is, seeing the pot as pot, jar as jar is
> drushti & seeing the pot and jar as nothing but clay is
> Atmaikatva drushti.
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list