[Advaita-l] Fwd: Why only jagat is mithya and jeeva is brahman !!??

Venkatesh Murthy (वेङ्कटेशः सीतारामार्यपुत्रः) vmurthy36 at gmail.com
Fri Mar 25 11:05:10 CDT 2016


This Madhva boy has not understood even Dvaiti illusion of Sukti
Rajata. The Dvaitis think even a false thing like Sukti Rajata is
seen. The cannot accept Asat Vastu can never been seen like us

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> Namaste Swamiji,
> I agree with both your observations about rule 1. It is samskAra of the
> adhyasyamAna that is required for its subsequent adhyAsa. That samskAra
> need not be generated by pramA alone. I had restricted my response to
> simply demonstrating that the "prior knowledge" need not be of a real
> entity.
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
> On 25 Mar 2016 8:33 a.m., "श्रीमल्ललितालालितः" <
> lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com> wrote:
>> Nicely replied.
>> Thanks, Venkataraghavan S.
>> You can change the rule 1's wording as:
>> there must be saMskAra of adhyasyamAna(the thing being superimposed), not
>> even GYAna. Why? because, it's anythAsiddha(just present with actual cause
>> of illusion). And, because there is no rule that every GYAna generates
>> saMskAra, as in case of knowledge of grass or dirt when we walk on road.
>> Add to this, that this GYAna which is itself not a cause of illusion, is
>> of two types: pramA and bhrama. There is no cause to believe that this
>> knowledge(generator of saMskAra which is cause of illusion) must be pramA.
>> So, their is no need to accept real world for illusion of world. [This is
>> what you said, although you skipped the quality of division and went to
>> it's subject. That's OK.]
>> For second rule, there is another example from sa~NxepashArIrakakAra: We
>> superimpose brAhmaNatva on body, but there is no similarity between jAti
>> and deha(dravya). Similarly, superimposition of body and consciousness also
>> defies their expectation.
>> I hope you can replace my usage of Sanskrit words with English one. I've
>> limited ability when it comes to English language.
>> This madhva boy doesn't understand that in their philosophy the
>> superimposed is alIka, but even then it is accepted to be perceptible. I
>> don't know why this bias towards superimposed and why they don't accept
>> same with hare's horn?
>> BTW, I was/am a part of madhva groups. I never put my opinion there in the
>> way this person is putting here, for saving mental peace. I hope that any
>> person who joins here is trying to learn advaitin's point of view. There is
>> no one forcing you to accept. So, just watch us and take important points
>> from here to enrich your understanding. Refutation(or making fun without
>> understanding?) can be done on some other platform or by writing a book. We
>> will welcome that. But, please don't spread your mental-disturbance here.
>> Most members are trying to learn from each other.
>> *श्रीमल्ललितालालितः*www.lalitaalaalitah.com
>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>> Namaste all,
>>> I am responding to the substantive portion of Sri Shiv Dinkar's argument.
>>> Let us leave the other emotive points about Advaita and advaitins aside,
>>> as
>>> they doesn't merit a response.
>>> Essentially his argument is for any adhyAsa of jagat to happen on the
>>> adhishThAna Brahman, two things are necessary as a rule - sine qua non, in
>>> his words.
>>> 1) there must be a previous knowledge of the adyastha vastu and
>>> adhishThAna
>>> vastu.
>>> 2) there must be similarity between adhyastha vastu and adhishThAna.
>>> Re rule 1, we agree. However that doesn't mean that the knowledge of the
>>> previous adhyastha vastu is of a *satya* vastu. If I see a ghost in a
>>> horror movie and when walking back from the cinema theater I see a shadow
>>> and think it is the ghost I saw, that is an adhyAsa of a ghost in the
>>> adhishThAna shadow. However, the basis for the previous ghost knowledge
>>> that enabled me to superimpose a ghost on the shadow now is not a  ghost
>>> that has paramArtha satyam. It is a mithyA ghost seen in a film.
>>> So while the requirement of prior knowledge of adhyastha vastu is fine, it
>>> is not necessary that the knowledge is generated by a real vastu "sine qua
>>> non". Even a mithyA vastu can generate the sanskAra for future adhyAsa.
>>> 2) Secondly, there is no absolute rule that similarity between adhyastha
>>> vastu and adhishThAna vastu be there for all adhyAsa to happen. Children
>>> and ignorant people look at the sky and say the sky is blue. Blueness is
>>> not an attribute of the sky, nor is there any similarity between blueness
>>> and sky. What is the similarity between mirage water and sand?
>>> This rule for similarity is just arbitrary and not "sine qua non".
>>> Anyway, Shivji, the reason I chose to respond to the two points was not
>>> because I thought logic could convince you - you have already dismissed my
>>> logical abilities :) - but in case other people have similar doubts about
>>> the requirements for adhyAsa.
>>> I also have no problem with your emotional outburst and wish you well in
>>> your understanding of dvaita.
>>> Regards,
>>> Venkatraghavan
>>> On 25 Mar 2016 6:08 a.m., "Venkatraghavan S" <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I believe this message was not sent to the list, forwarding for the sake
>>> of completion.
>>> >
>>> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> > From: "SHIVPRASAD DINKAR" <harivayus at bellsouth.net>
>>> > Date: 24 Mar 2016 10:22 p.m.
>>> > Subject: Why only jagat is mithya and jeeva is brahman !!??
>>> > To: "Srinath Vedagarbha" <svedagarbha at gmail.com>
>>> > Cc: "agnimile at gmail.com" <agnimile at gmail.com>
>>> >
>>> > Unless there is Sukthi before, and Rajatha has been known earlier, no
>>> projection of Rajatha on Sukthi is possible.  This Sukthi is Adhishtana
>>> while the Rajatha seen earlier is Pradhana.  Both these are similar to
>>> each
>>> other.  These two are essential and sine qua non to have the illusory
>>> projection of Rajatha over Sukthi.  Similarly, to have illusory projection
>>> of Jagat, two more Jagats are necessary.  One to serve as Adhishtana and
>>> the other to serve as Pradhana, that are Real.  If so, then the very
>>> purpose of envisaging the illusory projection of the world is defeated.
>>> This results in a situation whereby Adwaitins would be accepting TWO REAL
>>> WORLDs in their illogical anxiety to deny one real world.
>>> >
>>> > Sriman Jaya Tirtha makes fun of the illogic of Adwaithis as follows in
>>> his Teeka for Srimad Acharya's Vishnutatwa Vinirnaya - Pinyakayachanartham
>>> Gathasya Pishachasya Swarithailadhana Prathigyavath Adhikaha - Aapatath.
>>> >
>>> > Regards
>>> > Shiv
>>> >
>>> > PS:  No point in debating the logically challenged.  Most of them do not
>>> have the logical ability beyond than that of a 7th or 8th grader middle
>>> school kids.  They Will resort to circular logic, time and time again.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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