[Advaita-l] Mithya and Maya

[Michael Shepherd]

Bhagavan's powers of, on the one hand, veiling, and on the other hand, revealing, are a matter for sustained reflection !

Some say it is for the protection of truth itself..or perhaps to draw us towards vidya.

Part of my own reflections, is that we use maya, mithya, bhrama and avidya as more or less synonymous.

Yet mithya has the root mith, which the dictionary gives as to dispute angrily, or to altercate !

And maya has the equally surprising root maa, to measure, limit, give form.

Bhrama hovers between 'error, illusion, hallucination, perplexity'; and avidya can mean 'not knowing' in the sense either of being innocent of knowledge, or deliberately denying it !

So despite the tendency to see  maya as the enemy of true thought... maybe we should engage in mithya with those who have not seen the truth of things; and view maya as the beautiful sari concealing the beauty of the real form ! :)

Michael



-----Original Message-----
From: advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
[mailto:advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org]On Behalf Of Sarma
KV
Sent: 01 September 2009 06:30
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Mithya and Maya


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
------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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