[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Why only jagat is mithya and jeeva is brahman !!??
kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com
Tue Mar 29 09:52:55 CDT 2016
There seems to be endless mails on this topic. Looking at one of the latest, I get the impression that confusion persists in some quarters. Example of rope/snake is different from the mirage waters - one is jiiva sRishTi and the other is Iswara sRishti. or praatibhaasika adhyaasa and vyaavahaarika adhyaasa or different names have been provided.
I concur with Venkatraghavanji.
The BMI and the world - are ontologically of the same order of reality - similar to sun rise and sun set. Hence as long as BMI are there, perception of the world will be there - whether one is jnaani or not.
Jnaani is one who recognizes the apparent reality to the BMI and the world that is perceived or experienced - that realization comes only when one understands cognitively that the absolute real is that which is changeless - nirvikaaraH and hence nithyaH. This understanding takes place in the mind only.
Low of conservation demands that if something is changing there has to be changeless entity which is the substratum or adhishtaanam for the changing entity. - Krishna calls this as sat - to differentiate from asat -naasato vidyate bhaavo naabhaavo vidyate sataH. That for me is the absolute law of conservation.
Since the adhishtaanam of both BMI and the world - the apparent perceiver and apparent perceived are nothing but changeless entities - sat which scriptures also calls it as chit or ananda - Brahman or infinite, the scriptures emphasizes that alone is real and everything else is vyaavahaarika satyam or praatibhaasika satyam.
Jannam will destroy the praatibhaasika errors - just as rope/snake is destroyed when the underlying adhishtaanam is seen. Hence jiiva sRishTi which is I-ness, My-ness and raaga and dweshas get destroyed with the knowledge.
Jnaanam will not destroy the vyaavhaarika satyam - ring/gold or pot/ mud or world/Iswara (Brahman point there is no world even). However jnaanam involves in spite of understanding that everything is nothing but Brahman which is one without a second, he sees the world of plurality with the BMI as long as BMI is there to see (since they are both same order of reality). Only when the BMI drops out as in videha mukti - no more perceiver/perceived duality in Brahman.
Is ring real or not - or pot real or not - Just as they are real enough to use - utility itself is not criteria for absolute reality as in dream world of objects as Goudapaada establishes in vaitatya prakaraNam. Since BMI and the world are Iswara sRishti they do not disappear with janaam.
Only samsaara which is jiiva sRishTi disappears for a a jnaani.
I am not sure why there is so much confusion here. Bhashya also has to be understood with samanvayam in mind.
Seeing the world does not make it real - in fact it makes it mithyaa only since it is seen. As sat cannot be seen and asat also cannot be seen.
On Tue, 3/29/16, Aurobind Padiyath 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: "advaita-l at lists advaita-vedanta. org" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>, "Bhaskar YR" <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 29, 2016, 8:59 AM
If we see the pot
independent of mud, which is not possible and in reality
is name and form of the mudpot, then it has to
be defined as MithyA. As
there will have to
be the pot existence without mud. So the name and form
called pot of which the base is mud all put
together is Sat not MithyA. You
water etc with a MithyA pot. Like the snake case. That's
we are able to carry on Vyavahara even
after knowing that the pot is made
Same way for the Jnani, the jagat is
nothing but Brahman but the
Jagat is also of the same Brahman. If one sees a jagat
and forms) without knowledge and
existence of those names and forms (I
don't know how it will be possible),then
that jagat is mithya.
Yetra na anypascati =
Yetra anypascati = how can
this happen when one Knows the above? As there
is nothing in reality Anya.
On 29 Mar 2016 17:57,
"Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l" <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
> praNAms Sri
> Hare Krishna
> For a jnAni, when
Brahman is satya always (jnAna nishTa), is there a
> further need to mention jagat satya along
with Brahma satya ?
> By stating so, does
it further qualify or enhances it, by any means?
> Ø For
that matter for the ajnAni also jagat is satya only and from
> satyatva buddhi in jagat he does
the vyavahAra thinking that this jagat is
> his bhOga bhUmi and he is bhOktru, this
jagat is karma bhUmi thinking that
is kartru / karmi etc. So for his jagat is an independent
satya and he
> is an individual enjoyer /
sufferer etc. Whereas from the pAramArthika
> drushti of the jnAni, this jagat is not an
independent reality and jnAni is
> not an
independent enjoyer etc. Because in him there is no
> jneya triputi
vyavahAra. He sees Atman and only Atman in sarva vikAra,
> him jagat is not MITHYA it is satya
in its kAraNa svarUpa. From this
sarvAtma bhAva, whatever he does is satyameva.
> satyatvaM.clarifies shankara in
sUtra bhAshya. He is not declaring here
> jagat is mithyA and his vyavahAra with
this jagat is mithyA, it is
from the highest point of view that is brahmaikatva
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> 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