[Advaita-l] mithyaa / anirvachaniiya and asattva

Srinath Vedagarbha svedagarbha at gmail.com
Mon Mar 18 22:09:41 CDT 2013

On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 6:26 AM, Rajaram Venkataramani <
rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:

> >
> >
> RV:  It is not there and not experienced - asat (hare's horn). It is not
> there but experienced  - mithya (pot). It is there but not experienced as
> an object - sat (atman). Is there a category "It is there and experienced"?

Such thing cannot logically possible given the advaitic rule that "asat
chEt na pratIyata sat chEt na bhAdyata".

Category of type "It is there AND experienced" would suffer from ativyApti
fallacy between mithya category and sat category, for the first half of its
property of presenting it to "experience" over lapses with mithya
category, and at the same time its other half property of "it is there"
over-spans with sat category. Hence the very position of proposed new
category is logically untenable because of ativyApti dOSha.

However, for others who does not start with such dictum of "asat chEt na
pratIyata sat chEt na bhAdyata", your proposed new category is possible, at
least logically.


> Can brahman become an object of experience without losing its svarupa? I
> think that is Ishwara but am sure many would disagree who say Ishwara is
> mithya.
> _______________________________________________
> 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

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list