[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Why only jagat is mithya and jeeva is brahman !!??
H S Chandramouli
hschandramouli at gmail.com
Mon Apr 25 06:15:03 CDT 2016
Sri Bhaskar Ji wrote << When I have been addressed as ‘Mattur prakriya’
follower just because I was following Sri SSS’s teaching, I was not
offended nor thought that ‘Mattur prakriya’ is something different from
shankara’s prasthAna traya prakriya. So, it’s all depend on how you read
these lines and between the lines >>.
I am not really sure if by this Sri Bhaskar Ji is referring to his
understanding of the sloka "brahma satyaM jaganmithyA" is the same as that
that advanced by Mattur scholars or not. But I do believe that it is
liable to be understood as such by many of the members here.
My family is associated very closely with Mattoor scholars for well over a
century.On my recent visit to Shimoga ( Mattur is on its outskirts ) last
weekend, I spoke to Sri Aswathanarayana Avadhanigalu, a very learned
scholar there and whose views can be considered as representative of the
entire Scholar community there, over phone personally to clarify my doubts
in this regard. I very briefly mentioned to him about the topic of the
discussion here ( without mentioning any names except mine ) and requested
for his clarification on the following specific points.
1. Is the sloka beginning "brahma satyaM jaganmithyA" a work of Sri
2. If not does it reflect correctly the standpoint of Sri Bhagavatpada as
broughtout in his prasthAna traya Bhashya.
3. Is it correct to contend that “brahma satyaM jagat satya” reflects the
standpoint of Sri Bhavatpada as broughtout in his prasthAna traya
The following was his response. I quote him here.
<< 1. Apart from the prasthAna traya Bhashya, we recognize only Upadesa
Sahasri as the work of Sri Bhagavatpada. However we do impartially analyze
also the other works attributed to Sri Bhagavatpada by others and offer our
views as to whether they are in conformity with his standpoint as brought
out in the prasthAna traya Bhashya or not.
2. The sloka beginning with "brahma satyaM jaganmithyA" is to be found in
the work Vedanta Dindima which is not written by Sri Bhagavatpada. However
it reflects absolutely correctly the standpoint of Sri Bhagavatpada as
brought out in the prasthAna traya Bhashya.
3. “brahma satyaM jagat satya” does not reflect correctly the standpoint
of Sri Bhagavatpada as brought out in the prasthAna traya Bhashya. Brahman
is satya as the kAraNa for jagat , but since jagat is vivarta in Brahman it
is not satya but mithya only. >>
While I am not authorized to state this as the stand of the Mattur
Scholars, I vouchsafe for its authenticity since I have got the views
personally from Sri Aswathanarayana Avadhanigalu just last Saturday ( day
before yesterday ). This can certainly be considered as their
understanding. If anyone wants to crosscheck with Sri Avadhanigalu, please
feel free to quote me without any reservations.
I reiterate once again that I am not claiming that Sri Bhaskar Ji has
indeed stated his stand on this specific issue to be in accordance with
that of the Mattur scholars, but I felt that such a misunderstanding is
very likely in view of his observation quoted at the beginning of this post
and hence sought for the clarification directly from Sri Avadhanigalu to
remove any lingering doubts.
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> praNAms Sri Praveen Bhat prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
> This is not a response to the subject matter of the thread nor to your
> understanding vs. Pujya Swamiji's followers' understanding of the article,
> but only to your usage of the phrase "SDS school of thought". Being an
> antevAsI at Pujya Swamiji's gurukulam, out of respect to him, I would like
> to point out that he would never like this kind of usage about his
> teachings as his "school of thoughts" since he always said that he taught
> traditional Vedanta. This is FYI.
> Ø I mentioned SDS school of thought just to address the prabhuji-s who
> are closely following the teachings of Sri SDS & Swamy paramArthAnanda, not
> to offend anyone and no intention of drive away the traditional teaching
> of shankara from them. When I have been addressed as ‘Mattur prakriya’
> follower just because I was following Sri SSS’s teaching, I was not
> offended nor thought that ‘Mattur prakriya’ is something different from
> shankara’s prasthAna traya prakriya. So, it’s all depend on how you read
> these lines and between the lines ☺ By the way, though not directly
> relevant to this thread, just curious to know your clarification with
> regard to traditional stand on VC Vs questioning and doubting of same
> prakaraNa grantha with regard to contents and authorship from Arsha Vidya
> followers (for example previously Dr. Michael Comans & in ashrama Sri
> VasudevaachArya) . Which approach you think more traditional and authentic?
> PS: its not pUrNamadaM, its pUrNamadAH or pUrNamidaM.
> Ø Thanks for the correction…but we chant this mantra pUrNamadaH
> pUrNamidaM etc. an elongated ‘A’ in pUrNamadAH as you have written above,
> would force me to chant deergha to the ‘da’. That is my way of reading the
> transliterated Sanskrit words ☺ Anyway, I am not so good at transliterated
> writing nevertheless I write it without any fear coz. I know prabhuji-s
> like you would always be eager to pick these mistakes and correct it ☺
> 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