[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Why only jagat is mithya and jeeva is brahman !!??
sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com
Mon Mar 21 13:41:47 CDT 2016
You let the cat out of the bag by saying "Probably our understanding of the whole phenomena is deficient and our reasoning faculty is not measuring enough to unravel what is Brahman." That is because we are trying to do the impossible, i.e., to have a continuity between the Vyavaharika Satya and the Paramarthika Satya. Both are Satyas but in different dimensions. The Vyavaharika Satya disappears at the very moment of true realization of the Paramarthika Satya. Until we become able to curb / destroy our desires and develop the Vairagya, all our knowledge of Advaita is mere academic exercise. The knowledge of Advaita is useful to begin with, but it become effective and produce result when we develop the Vairagya. At that stage we essentially become the Sanyashi, not necessarily by our attire, but by our attitude. The Vyavaharika Satya vanishes for the realized, but not for the world.. The Sun and Moon will shine for the others but the realized will become one with the Sun and the Moon and everything.
My 2 cents
Sunil K. Bhattacharjya
On Mon, 3/21/16, Srirudra via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Why only jagat is mithya and jeeva is brahman !!??
To: "H S Chandramouli" <hschandramouli at gmail.com>, "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Date: Monday, March 21, 2016, 2:09 AM
the Mandukyopanishad while dealing with the rope snake
analogy to explain the world as an illusion only,it is said
that a substratum is necessary to create even an illusion.So
the rope is necessary to create an illusion of a snake.If
there is no rope there can not be an illusion of a snake.So
Brahman is the substratum on which Jiva sees the world which
is an illusion or simply mithya.It follows that there should
be similarity between Brahman and the world.Probably with
this in view other schools of thought like Saivism,Sankhyam
etc were derived or propagated.Gaudapada Kariga can be taken
as a reference.
Upanishad says that the substratum or Brahman is not the
cause of the world .Though Jivas mistake the universe as
projected by Brahman,Brahman has no role in it is the firm
contention of the vedantins.
So it is not
correct to say there was creation as Brahman desired like
that etc are not compatible with the attributes of
Brahman.Brahman is poornam.He has no desire to fulfil and
He does not require to play to get Himself engaged in
creation to satisfy Him.
This is very
difficult to grasp .We are not able to get rid of our
amazement on seeing the world outside with Sun Moon and
other celestial objects following a pattern in clockwise
precision.Plants,animals moving around with their assigned
roles.We in our little thinking capacity come to a
conclusion that there should be a single command which makes
all these things happen.
speaks of -for out of fear of Brahman the fire fires ,the
Sun shines etc-.
Therefore it is difficult
to reconcile an action less Brahman.If the entire thing is
an illusion does it mean all human beings are seeing the
Probably our understanding of
the whole phenomena is deficient and our reasoning faculty
is not measuring enough to unravel what is Brahman.
Sent from my
> On 21-Mar-2016,
at 1:29 PM, H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Venkateswaran Ji and Sri Ravi Kiran Ji,
>> Reg the
question posed by Sri Venkateswaran Ji
>> << To
differentiate between the adhiSTAna (of jagat) and svarUpa
>> jIva), I am attempting two
analogies as follows.
>> Request the
learned members to comment.
>> 1. Brahman being the adhiSTAna of
jagat can be explained by the mirage in
>> the desert, wherein the mirage has
nAma-rUpa but ultimately it is bhrama
>> (illusion) with the hot sand being
only the adhiSTAna, but not its svarUpa.
>> 2. The
svarUpa of jIva being Brahman can be explained using the
>> gold-ornaments example, wherein when
you remove the nAma-rUpa of the
ornaments, only the gold (svarUpa) remains.>>,
>> both the
illustrations mentioned are together useful in
>> the statement
<< Brahma Satyam Jaganmithya >> ( Brahman being
>> of jagat) only.
>> Brahman was
(ekamebAdvitIyam) in the beginning. This
>> “expands” as jagat. The
explanation for this process should also be
>> consistent with other advaitic
concepts like सत्कारण सत्कारय
>> (satkAraNa satkAraya vAda
) , cause and effect relation etc. The gold
>> ornaments illustration is helpful in
this regard in the following manner.
>> This illustration could be extended
to पंचीकृत पंच भूत
>> paMcha bhUta)
transforming into the gross Creation. paMchIkRRita paMcha
>> bhUtas refer to Gold and the gross
Creation refer to Ornaments. It should
>> be noted that both this and the gold
ornament illustration involves विकार
>> (vikAra ) (modification) of the
>> But the Shruti declares Brahman as
निर्विकार(nirvikAra) (not subject to
>> modification). How is this to be
adhered to? Here is where the second
>> illustration of mirage water helps.
The “modification” of Brahman into
>> पंचीकृत पंच
भूत is explained in terms of this illustration. Thus
>> “expands” into the
entire gross Creation without undergoing any change
>> This also establishes the mithya
character of the gross Creation
originating from Satya Brahman.
>> I have considered only part of jagat
in this explanation. It is to be
extended to the whole of Creation.
>> This is how the two illustrations
together are useful in understanding the
>> statement ब्रह्म
सत्यम् जगन्मिथ्या (brahma
satyam jaganmithyA) ( Brahman
the adhiSTAna of jagat).
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or
change your options:
> For assistance,
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
To unsubscribe or change your
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list