[Advaita-l] JAGAT MITHYATVAM IN ADVAITA - A CONCLUSION - part -1
ravikiranm108 at gmail.com
Sat Apr 30 22:37:19 CDT 2016
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Sati Shankar <studiesggroup at gmail.com>
> Thanks for kind attention.
> I think the core lies in,
> "He, *PrajApati,* (= brahmn) manifests in "Himself", so this universe,
> *idam sarvam*,
> percieved according to *anurUpam, pratirUpam*,to be declared " One and
> Manifested",* idam sarvam*, is where two opposites or better say
> counterparts as pperceived in duality, sat-asat, sat-muthyA, ... etc...
> are the :syzygy of Conjoint principle" as *PrajApti*, thus manifested
> with his own multifarious *sva-bhAva,* The said conjoint principle, on
> which RigVeda has enough to support, the way being *anurUpah*,
> *pratirUpah,*(JBU.I.27), refers to the situation where we can question
> how He when menifests in himself be, even in part a mithyA,
Right, there is no entity *existing* apart (anya) from ekam eva adviteeya
paramArtha vastu (Brahman), as said in Sruti,
yato vA imAni bhUtAni jAyante.. ( Tait. U)
satyam jnAnam anantam Brahma ( Tait. U)
satyasya satyaM (BU)
सलिल एको द्रष्टाद्वैतो भवति (BU),
> I am not making an statement but yes this aspect has some broken link in
> the continuous history of our traditional commentaries, which needs to be
> checked and clarified.
> Sati Shankar
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 9:12 PM, Sati Shankar via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>> I feel lucky having joined this group, at least I reached a place where
>>> some meaningful discussion is going on.
>>> Many of the variations which we encounter are due to semantics*, mithyA*
>>> never an illusion nor "False" as we encounter in textbook and general
>>> texts. When I started studying, found AchArya Shankar himself has said he
>>> had been saying what has been already there and this led me go backward
>>> right to Rig Veda.and hence started reconsidering most of the core as a
>>> facet of continuity. same applies to unity and duality also.
>>> I can not be comprehensive here is a short note:
>>> Let us consider our own tradition;
>>> In our Sanatan tradition, whatever we perceive, the form and name it,*
>>> nAma - rUpa*, is realised in our tradition as *vishvam ekam*, (RV.
>>> 3.54.8), the many are the One and the One that is manifold, *vishvam
>>> satyam*, (RV. 2.24.12); the manifold truth,and *vishvam .....garbham*
>>> 10.121.7). therefore, if asked, "Is He One or many?", our tradition
>>> says,"One and many", The general principle is ,the *devah* is every where
>>> of one and the same form. (RV.8.11.8)., that is, "Even as he seems, so is
>>> he named" (RV. 5.44.6)., the way being *anurUpah*, *pratirUpah,*
>>> (JBU.I.27). So how can there be a part *satyam *and an other* mithyA?*
>>> He, *PrajApati,* manifests in "Himself", so this universe, *idam sarvam*,
>>> pecieved according to *anurUpam, pratirUpam*,to be declared " One and
>>> many". It is the semantic mis-marriage that the translation of the
>>> Sukta*, the Manifestation Hymn, as called the "Creation Hymn", which
>>> signifies the error interpretation and naming by the Indologists had in
>>> their minds the "Creationist presuppositions" of Christianity. Therefore,
>>> using the "God" for the "Self. Manifested",* idam sarvam*, is like
>>> limiting Him and equally makes "theology" a term unfit to proceed for
>>> jijnAsA* of our tradition.*PrajApti*, thus manifested in Himself,* idam
>>> sarvam*,selforganizes in dharma by his own multifarious *sva-bhAva,*
>>> that in Him are all beings, *idam sarvam,- manas, prAnah, nAma-rUpa, *are
>>> within, as coincident; " sent by Him onto him, and born of Him into him,
>>> is in Him that all this universe is stabilised, that is how our tradition
>>> invokes for *shAnti, ... sarve devAh shAntih, nakshatrh shAntih,
>>> vanaspatayah shantih.....aum shAntih, shAntih, shAntih..*. to keep the
>>> equilibrium in *idam sarvam* intact, for welfare of the cosmos. Our
>>> scriptures teach,"*idam sarvam brahm*" and therefore, being a
>>> within, *Aham brahmAsmi* since we ,*aikik *and *samyaka *are this
>>> sarvam*", well connected in such a way that a chance deviation at any
>>> level, be it microcosm or macrocosm, does not leave unaffected within.
>>> "idam sarvam brahmn" how can there be something called mithyA?
>> Thanks. In the same light,
>> in that samyak jnAna or brahmAtmaikatva jnAna, is there a "jagat vishEsha
>> jnAna" also embedded?
>> If so, comes the next question for discussion, whether such a jagat, is
>> sathya or mithya ?
>> Or in other words,
>> When we discuss jagat as sathya or jagat as mithya, is it not that
>> the jnAna takes the rUpa as "jagat sathya" ( vishEsha jnAna A) in upAdhi
>> 1 and
>> the jnAna takes the rUpa as "jagat mithya" ( vishEsha jnAna B) in upAdhi 2
>> What is the svarUpa (source or nature) of such vishEsha jnAna ?
>> Does that svarUpa jnAna (paramArtha sathya) have any place for (or has
>> anything to do with)
>> vishEsha's like jagat sathya or jagat mithya ?
>>> So is the observation by this ignorant.
>>> Sati Shankar.
>>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l <
>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>> > praNAms
>>> > Hare Krishna
>>> > First of all my heartfelt praNAms to all prabhuji-s who have patiently
>>> > participated in this discussion and shared their thoughts. After
>>> > exchanging more than 200 mails on this topic, as I promised I am
>>> > down my final thoughts on it. I must say here by no means it is 'the'
>>> > conclusion in Advaita saMpradAya but shared thoughts do have the base
>>> > shankara bhAshya and shruti. And more importantly Sri SSS's works too
>>> > somewhere advocated this same view point. From all these discussion,
>>> > can flatly conclude that there is no difference of opinion on
>>> > brahmaikatvaM, satyatvaM, nirvisheshatvaM etc., there is no
>>> difference of
>>> > opinion on availability of this jagat in vyavahAra to each and every
>>> > hence jagat astitvaM has been accepted as vyavahArika satta and again
>>> > there is no difference of opinion about jeeva svarUpa is ultimately
>>> > only (jeevO brahmaiva na apara) in these discussions. Problem starts
>>> > us when one party say for the jagat brahman is the only abhinna
>>> > nimittOpadAna kAraNa hence not mithyA but from its causal form satya
>>> > The other party says brahman is the adhishtAnam of this jagat but for
>>> > jagat brahman is mere vivartOpadAna kAraNa and mAya is the pariNAmi
>>> > kAraNa. Since there is no svagata bheda we cannot say jagat is
>>> > and jagat is mithyA only because it is ever changing whereas brahman is
>>> > nirvikAri and nirvishesha. I think with regard to all these issues we
>>> > already talked a lot and finally after some mutual agreements and
>>> > disagrements we stuck at one point. i.e. What would be the jnAni's
>>> > of this jagat after realizing his adviteeya svarUpa. Whether he look
>>> > the jagat as mithyA or satya?? Since his drushti / realization is what
>>> > shruti and AcharyOpadesha based. We have to see what shrtuti and
>>> > bhagavatpAda offer with regard to this. It is true that for the
>>> > like me/us it is not possible to determine what exactly is the jnAni's
>>> > hrudaya spandana, atleast from the shruti and bhAshya reference we can
>>> > to understand what would be the perception of jnAni with regard to this
>>> > jagat. Whether this jagat is satya or mithya.
>>> > First of all, before quoting the shruti and bhAshyakAra, I would like
>>> > quote couple of references from my parama guruji Sri SSS from one of
>>> > articles published in 2014 from adhyAtma prakAsha kAryAlaya in monthly
>>> > magazine adhyAtma prakAsha and another one from his minor work 'brahma
>>> > vidyA'. I am just reproducing the first one i.e. article in adhyAtma
>>> > prakAsha as it is written in Kannada :
>>> > // quote //
>>> > haagaadare tattvajnAnavAdamelAdarU prapanchavu mithyeyendu tOruvudO
>>> > ?? Aga mAtra idu mithyeyaagi tOralu kAraNavenu?? endu yaaraadaru
>>> > bahudu. idakke uttaravenendare, nijavaagi yaavaagalu prapanchavu
>>> > mithyavendu kaaNisuvude illa. ekendare Atmanannu bittare
>>> > bereyaagi iruvudilla. ajnAnigaLige avara paramAtma svarUpavu tiLiyadu.
>>> > Addarinda avaru bhinabhinnaraagiruva jeevarugaLannu alli avarugaLu
>>> > vyavaharisuttiruva prapanchavannu kaaNuttiruttaare. Adare avaru
>>> > AtmasAkshAtkAravannu padedare " idellavu Atmane" emba shrutiya
>>> > managANuttaare. Aga avarige prapanchavu Atmane Agi biduvudarinda adu
>>> > paramasatyavaagi biduttade.
>>> > Addarinda "jagattu mithyeye?? "? emba prashnege katta kadeya uttaravu
>>> > yaavadaayitu?? adu taaniruva paramArtha rUpadalli Atmane, brahmave.
>>> > Addarinda adu nijavaagiye satyavaagide hIge nOdidare yaavadondU
>>> > alla. ajnAnigaLige tOruttiruva brahma bhinnavaada jagattembudu illave
>>> > illa; Addarinda adannu satyavendaagali, mithyavendaagali
>>> > kaaraNavilla. jagattendaadaru kareyiri, brahmavendaadaru kareyiri;
>>> > Onde Ondu adviteeyavAda paramArtha satyavu. adakkinta bereyaagi
>>> > iruvade illa.
>>> > // unquote //
>>> > Those who can read and understand Kannada, above two paragraphs are
>>> > self-explanatory. And those who donot know Kannada the gist of above
>>> > observation of Sri SSS is about jnAni's perception of jagat after the
>>> > svarUpa jnana. Sri SSS poses a question here : After realization
>>> > this jagat become mithyA for the jnAni?? And why this jagat would
>>> > mithyA for the jnAni only after realization?? For this Sri SSS
>>> clarifies :
>>> > THERE IS NOTHING LIKE MITHYA PRAPANCHA AT ANY POINT OF TIME because
>>> > prapancha (jagat) does not deviate from brahman and does not exist
>>> > from brahman. Only ajnAni-s due to their parichinna jnana would see
>>> > various jeeva-s and manifold objects and transactions. When they
>>> > they would come to know that 'all this is Atman only'. Therefore, Sri
>>> > in second pyara concludes : For the question : is this jagat
>>> mithyA?? The
>>> > ultimate answer is : that (jagat) in its sadrUpa (paramArtha rUpa)
>>> > only brahman only. Therefore this (jagat) is REAL, FOR THAT MATTER
>>> > IS NOTHING THAT CAN BE CALLED 'MITHYA'. For the ajnAni-s this jagat
>>> > appear bhinna from brahman (separate from brahman), that which does not
>>> > exist at all. Therefore no need for exercise like tattvAnyatvAbhyAm
>>> > this avidyA kalpita jagat. Whether you call this jagat or brahman
>>> what is
>>> > there is ONLY one and that is paramArtha satya there exists nothing
>>> > from it.
>>> > And Sri SSS further clarifies in brahma vidye (again a Kannada book) at
>>> > the end quotes one shruti vAkya : brahma dAshA brahma dAsA brahmaiveme
>>> > kitavAH and advises that realization of this universal truth
>>> > satya) is the parama purushArtha jnana, janma sAphalya jnana. Those
>>> > attain this jnana is dvija Sri SSS quotes manu here.
>>> > And in his various prakaraNa works like jeevanta vedAnta, anubhava
>>> > paryanta vedAnta, mAndUkya rahasya vivruttiH, shAnkara vedAnta,
>>> > Misconceptions about shankara vedAnta etc. Sri SSS deals with this
>>> > and clarifies that sarvAtmakatvaM is what is advocated in shankara's
>>> > Advaita vedAnta and jagan mithyatvaM is not an essential criterial to
>>> > arrive this truth.
>>> > In the next part we shall look into the shruti and shankara bhAshya (
>>> > which I have already covered in my previous mails) to this effect.
>>> > Hari Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>>> > bhaskar
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
>>> > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>> > For assistance, contact:
>>> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>> *Sati Shankar <http://www.satishankar.com>*
>>> Global Synergetic Foundation <http://www.globalsynergetic.org/>
>>> *Social Links:* Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/drssdutt> Twitter
>>> <https://twitter.com/satishankar> G+
>>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>>> For assistance, contact:
>>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> *Sati Shankar <http://www.satishankar.com>*
> Global Synergetic Foundation <http://www.globalsynergetic.org/>
> *Social Links:* Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/drssdutt> Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/satishankar> G+
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list