[Advaita-l] Waking & Dream states - An objective outlook

[Sanjay Srivastava]

Namaste Bhaskar-ji. Thanks for reposting your "Waking and Dream State-
An objective outlook". It was a long post and I had to chew it in
several parts. I agree with most of your analysis and am quoting only
those parts where I am unclear.

You wrote:

"Kindly note that I am not denying  the  fact  that  the  waking 
state is the one in which alone real
action  is  possible.."

Why so? If I am giving equal validity to both the states, why do I
insist that "real" action can be done only in the waking state? (I am
taking "real" in vyAvhArik sense since no "real" action is possible in
pramArthik sense.)

And from whose standpoint is this claim being made? If I am making
this claim from waker's point of view, it is mere tautology since
waker will always find anything "real" only in waking state. If I am
making this claim from avasthAtita sAkshi standpoint, again, it does
not make sense since actin in both states will be equally real or
unreal.

> Yes I agree with you that bhagavadpAda was not in any of these states as he
> is, being a brahma jnAni, *avasthAtIta*...but you can see, inspite of that
> he is *telling* this why?? & to whom this has been addressed??

This has been replied in Bala's earlier post. I am quoting it again:

"There is a flow of
time, vaikuNTha, shiva-loka, etc. All these have an empirical reality,
but are also similar to dream objects *in the sense that they are
superimpositions on brahman*. Of course, one need not be realized to
appreciate this philosophical position."

Clearly, philosophical appreciation of this position is not dubted.
The question is, should it affect our treatment of actions as of now?
More specifically in the current context of rAslIlA, can we say that
the rAslIlA of swapna (assuming *swapna* interpretation to be correct
for the time being) has the same validity as of jAgrat?

> Yes, this is what exactly I've discussed in my subject mail...we cannot
> make arbitrary remarks on other two states by holding one state's
> reality....either we have to accept all states are equally real  or all the
> three states are mere superimposition on Atman...

I am again lost here. I can philosophically appreciate this position
for an avasthAtita purusha. But since this argument is being made by
me in my waking state, how far am I justified in this claim?

praNAm