[Advaita-l] mithyaa / anirvachaniiya and asattva

[Naresh Cuntoor]

> I think you did not grasp the crucial, non-trivial difference, that was
> made out between mithyA and alIka (asat) examples:  pratIyamAnatvam
> (pratItiyogyatA) with regard to a mithyA vastu and apratIyamAnatvam
> (pratItiyogyatAbhAvaH) with asat vastu.  One can mistake a distant pillar
> (or a tree shorn of branches) for a person: sthANau puruShabhramaH.  But no
> one will / can mistake the sthANu for a vandhyAputraH.
>
>
No one will mistake sthANu for vandhyAputraH. Because vandhyAputra is
alIka. Until that point, we are not disagreeing. (Further I not saying that
vandhyAputra exists in dream, nor that vandhyAputra is mithyA).

Why is vandhyAputraH alIka (and not something that is  'mistakeable' for
sthANu)? That is what I am trying to understand - and what types of asattva
it illustrates. From what I have heard in this thread, he is alIka because
there is a logical contradiction. But there is no contradiction, only a
tautology. If something is alIka because of a tautology, it is a trivial
example.

- Naresh