[Advaita-l] Mithya and Maya

[Sarma KV]

Thank you, Sri Jaldhar.
I rapped myself for trying to 'correct' what you (Jaldhar) wrote. I knew
that you meant it right, but I just wanted to dwell for a little longer
'thinking' about the concept. Hence the mail.

namO namaH
-Sarma

On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 12:25 AM, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>wrote:

> On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Sarma KV wrote:
>
> Dear Sri Jaldhar,
>>
>> The word *mithya* doesn't mean "false." It means "transient", not
>> constant,
>> not permanent, not lasting (naSvaram = bound to perish), and
>> not-independent. Jagat is leela.
>> In contrast brahma is satyam. It is not-transient. It is independent,
>> Sudhdham and nityam.
>>
>> This is Sankara's view behind using the word "*mithya*" rather than "*
>> asatyam*" or some other word to mean "false."
>>
>>
> This is the problem with translating Sanskrit concepts I suppose.  What I
> specifically mean by false is epistemologically false.  Perhaps it is better
> put as "invalid" rather than "false".
>
>
> --
> Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>



-- 

------------------------------------------------------------------
नगुरोरधिकं नगुरोरधिकं नगुरोरधिकं नगुरोरधिकम्।
शिवशासनतश्शिवशासनतः शिवशासनतश्शिवशासनतः ।।

Best Regards,
Syam
------------------------------------------------------------------