Still Confusion regarding Shankara’s co

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Rushikesh K. Joshi wrote:

> > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Rushikesh K. Joshi wrote:
>
> Appearances in dream have no outside independent existence, but for in the
>  dream.
> So is the world.
>

If observer A is looking at a pot and observer B is looking at the same
pot whose dream is the pot occuring in?  If it is one or the other, why
does it appear exactly the same to both?  (For instance if the pot
breaks, why do both A and B decide to dream the same pot has broken at
the exact same time) If they are sharing the same dream, what happens to
A's perception when B stops dreaming i.e achieves moksha?  Does the pot
disappear or does A continue to see it?  What is the status of the pot if
A then achieves moksha and observer C comes along?

You can see that a radical idealism which treats objects as being wholly
illusionary will only end up in absurdity.  That is why Vedanta makes no
such claim.  The pot has an essential existence which is illumined by
Brahman.  It appears different from Brahman because of maya.  Sometimes
the Acharya have used language of awakening from a dream as an evocative
metaphor for jnana but it is not something to be taken literally.

--
Jaldhar H. Vyas [jaldhar at braincells.com]   And the men .-_|\ who hold
Consolidated Braincells Inc.                          /     \
http://www.braincells.com/jaldhar/ -)~~~~~~~~  Perth->*.--._/  o-
"Witty quote" - Dead Guy   /\/\/\ _ _ ___ _  _ Amboy       v      McQ!