[Advaita-l] mithyaa / anirvachaniiya and asattva
vmurthy36 at gmail.com
Sat Mar 16 00:34:16 CDT 2013
Namaste Sri Sadananda Mahodaya
In dream there is no difference between Vandhya Putra and real Putra
because anything is possible in a dream. I can see anything. How can
there be a restriction? I am seeing a dream always. When I sleep it is
a dream. When I think I am awake I am dreaming. Both waking and dream
are dream only. In the dream I can see a Vandhya Putra I can see a
Gagana Kusuma and I can see a Rabbit with Horns and Rabbit barking
like a dog. Everything is possible in a dream. A dream is not real.
In so called waking we cannot see half man half lion. But we believe
Puranas saying there is Narasimha. It is possible there is Half Man
Half Lion. Like this it is possible in dream there will be a Vandhya
Putra and other so called impossible things.
There is nothing impossible to see in a dream.
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 8:03 AM, kuntimaddi sadananda
<kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Shree Naresh - praNAms - You are now entering into discussions of what is real, what is unreal and what is mithyaa.
> There are some definitions that follow Navya Nyaaya.
> Real as per advaita is trikaala abhaaditam
> satyam - that which can never be negated at any time.
> Unreal is that following Madhusudana's Advaita
> Siddhi - that which has no locus for existence. Vandhyaa putraH is logical
> contradiction and therefore no existence is possible. Horns of the rabbit -
> Nyaaya says is unreal since up to now no one has seen. There is no logical
> contradiction here and one can create a rabbit in the dream with horns or there
> may be other worlds where rabbits may have horns. The Nyaaya definition pertains
> to human experience so far. Implication of this is - Existence of an object is
> established by the knowledge of its existence. Otherwise it is an indeterminate
> problem which is what I referred to anirvachaniiyam.
> Mithyaa is defined as sat asat vilakshaNam -
> which is neither sat nor asat - since the world is experienced it cannot be
> asat (unlike the rabbit-horns) but it is not non-negatable therefore not real
> also. This Shankara calls it as anirvacaniiyam - there are extensive
> discussions on the anirvacaniiya khyaati and Bhagavan Rmanuja criticizes the
> advaitic position in his Shree Bhaashya on Brahma suutras.
> Hence from the advaitic position the whole
> creation is anirvacaniiyam since how an infinite pure consciousness appears as
> unconscious entities. Hence mayaa that makes it appear is called aghaTita
> ghaThanaa paTiiyasi maayaa - that which makes impossible possible.
> Hence your statement that calls vyavahaara as
> anirvachaniiyam is not far from advaitic position.
> When I used the existence of the objects in deep
> sleep is anirvacaniiyam - I mean even from our vyaavahaarika reference, since
> existence of the objects are established by the knowledge of their existence.
> We cannot say they exist nor we cannot say they do not exist. From mathematics
> it is an indeterminate problem. Mandukya Up. says - na kanchana kaamam
> kaamayate – there is no desire for objects – not that one has become jnaani but
> there is no perception of objects since perceiving mind along with senses is
> folded. Hence there is no knowledge of their existence as we have no knowledge of existence of objects in a pitch dark room.
> Hari Om!
> 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