[Advaita-l] Real vs Unreal

[sthanunathan Ramakrishnan]

I have always wanted to clarfiy my doubts on this.

Why is "real" defined as the unchangeable, eternal and
absolute. In what sense is a changeable thing not
real. Is there not a dichotomy between what we
generally think of as real and this definition of
real.

 And if this definition is accepted, I guess all
schools of philosophy would agree that Brahman alone
is real. Then is the cause of philosophical disputes
over the definition of what is meant by "real"

regards
Sthanu 

You are right...
  Real is unchangealble, eternal, absolute that is
Bhraman
the unreal, temporal,realtive is this "I" ego created
by mind (manas)
   
  This is what I understood as 'Advaitha'
  
Sylvain <elisabeth-sylvain at sympatico.ca> wrote:
  For me "real" and "unreal" are more understandable
if we mean ...
"real" = unchangeable, eternal, Absolute
"unreal = changeable, perishable, relative

In this context, the relative conscience of the vast
majority of humans 
is 
"unreal", while "relative" is clearer to the mental
(manas).

Is this compatible with advaita ?

Sylvan




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com