[Advaita-l] Can a mithyA-vastu produce an effect? असत्यवस्तुनः अर्थक्रियाकारित्वम्

[V Subrahmanian]

2011/5/23 Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com>

> Namaste
>
>
> The dream woman will be true only according to Sribhashya.


There can't be a greater proof for the fact that the dream is the jiva's
imagination than the test: upon waking if the 'other' members of the dream
are consulted for testifying the dream event, none would.


> God only
> creates all dream objects for every Jeeva according to Papa and Punya.
> That Jeeva experiences the dream objects created for him.
>
> स्वप्ने च प्राणिनां पुण्यपापानुगुणं भगवतैव तत्तत्पुरुषमात्रानुभाव्याः
> तत्तत्कालावसानाः तथाभूताश्च अर्थाः सृज्यन्ते ।
> He is referring  Bruhadaranyaka Sruti Na Tatra Rathaha to prove God
> creates the dream things. The Jeeva cannot create them because he has
> is bound in Samsara.
>
> There is no way to prove dream objects are false.
>


Advaita is not against the vasana theory.  Gaudapada has proved the falsity
of dream objects thru several yuktis. Being bound in samsara is a boon for
creation.  The jiva, owing to avidya > kAma > karma produces enough inputs
for Ishwara to create the bhoga/bhogya vastu not just for himself but for
others also. In the recent past I have posted verses from the Bhagavatam on
the topic of dream, dream objects and their unreality.  This only
corroborates the Advaitic interpretation of the 'na tatra rathaaH' of the
Br.Up.
--


> The dream woman is real. The union of man and dream woman is real.
> Recently there was one case. The wife went for divorce because husband
> was doing bad things online. You cannot argue the husband was innocent
> because woman on screen is Mithya and the union with her was Mithya.
>
Bad thinking.
>


Here the case is one with the perverted behaviour of the man.


Regards

subrahmanian.v
_______________________________________________