[Advaita-l] Eka jiva vada and nana jiva vada.

[kuntimaddi sadananda]

Shree Venkatesh - PraNAms
I
am not sure where the problem is. The definitions provided by Goudapaada
are clear. Perceptibility, utility, experiencability, even transactability
either in the waking state, dream state and in fact in any particular state is
not the criteria for reality. In the vaitatya prakaraNa he is using dream as example to establish the mityaatvam of even the waking state. The defintions are:
 
Real is that which never undergoes any
modification; and only that can fit in that category is infiniteness - since
infinite cannot undergo any transformation - infiniteness is Brahman. Hence nityatvam is the criterian for satyatvam.
Hence
anything that is perceived, experienced, transacted in any particular state is
mithyaa only since it is perceived, experienced and/or transacted in that
particular state. Since only finites can be perceived, experinced and/or transacted.
Anything that has no locus for
existence for one to experience in any state is asat in that state. There is no upaadhi for the object for one to experience. 
These
three types have to be accepted since definitions are precise and based on our
own experience. Even dvaitins and/or vishiShTaadvaitins have to differentiate
gold from the ornaments of gold since is one is adhiShTaanam while the other is
superimposition - hence the degrees of reality of the two are different. Brahman being infinite and existent entity cannot but be the adhishTaanam for everything that is experienced - this is a logical statement and scriptures confirms this as - it itself became many- meaning it itself appears as many since it cannot really become many, being infinite.
If one imagines a ghost in his mind which he can after
reading some horror books or movies - that imagination can be either in the waking state or in the
dream state, for him who sees and thus experiences it is  real and even
transactionally real since he, in his mind, is dealing with that ghost, afraid of that ghost and has increased BP etc . That ghost
can be appearing in the form of the elephant that you have described. Is real no since it is not nithyam and is it unreal not for him since he is experincing - hence for him it is mithyaa. For others who have not experienced since it is imagination of the dreamer, that is unreal. I see no problem here.
The
essential point that has to be recognized is - Anything that is experienced apparently real
or imaginary is mithyaa - Shankara just says - dRisyatvaat - in GK bhaashya.
Anything that is not experienced or experincable is asat. End of the story. In
the future if he experiences since he experiences, for that experiencer that is
mithyaa only - since by definition sat cannot be experienced since it is
infinite and asat cannot be experienced since it is asat. Any thing experienced is mithyaa. Is is vyaavhaarika or praatibhaasika - for the one who is transcating with that it is vyaavhaarika and it is not transactable for others it is only praatibhaasika from their reference. These are terms just to differentiate  jiiva sRiShTi and Iswara sRishTi. 
If a
person sees the strange things whether it is in the dream or in the waking
state - then it is mithyaa. If the strange things are his creations - we call
it as praatibhaasika - like a snake on the rope. If everybody sees then it is more
objective reality hence we call it vyaavahaarika. These are relative to
subjective or objective experiences. The same dream object is objective if
everybody in the dream also sees that object. These are relative vyavahaarika
for that state. The reference state for each perception has to be clear. In
essence anything experienced apparently real or imaginary is mithyaa only. 
When the definitions are very clear I fail
to see why there should be any confusion in these. 
Hari Om!
Sadananda
 


>________________________________
> From: Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com>
>To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> 
>Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 12:37 AM
>Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Eka jiva vada and nana jiva vada.
>  
>
>Namaste
>
>In GK VP 8 Adi Sankara has discussed चतुर्दन्तं गजमारूढं अष्टभुजमात्मानं.
>The Purva Pakshi is saying we can see four tusk elephants and eight arms
>person in dreams. The answer is this Apurva is Sthani Dharma. The dream
>objects like four tusk elephants are also false. But in the same teaching
>Gaudapada has said dream objects and waking objects are unreal only. There
>is no difference.
>
>If a person imagines a rabbit with horns or seeing a four tusk elephant in
>a dream or he is seeing a table and chair in waking all these objects are
>equally unreal. All seen and imagined objects in dream and waking are
>unreal. Why some Advaitis are seeing difference between them?They are
>saying waking object seen is Mithya. It is not Sat not Asat not both Sat
>and Asat but Rabbit horns is not same. But they are contradicting with
>Gaudapada.
>
>On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:26 AM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>> > Namaste
>> >
>> >   In waking if I imagine a hare horns in my
>> > mind I can say it is not real.
>> >
>>
>> In every imagination, especially of objects, there is a picture/form of
>> that object that also comes up in the mind.  What form does the imagination
>> of 'hare's horn' have in the mind?  One can imagine/recollect only what is
>> already seen/experienced before.  We have seen cow/buffalo/ram/rhino/deer
>> horns and not hare's horn.  We can distinguish between those horns even if
>> they lie separated from those animals.  But what form does the memory carry
>> for a hare's horn?
>>
>> So, in the waking you can at best hear/read or recall to the mind the
>> idea/concept of 'hare's horn', I mean just the words and no object.  And
>> along with that  is there the thinking about the impossibility of it too.
>> One can surely have such a thinking in the dream too since we have
>> read/discussed/thought of the concept of hare's horn in the waking.
>>
>> On an aside, I would like to know who are shringi  and bhringi in relation
>> to Shivaloka?  Is there any description of this horned entity in the
>> puranas or other literature?
>>
>> subrahmanian.v
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Regards
>
>-Venkatesh
>_______________________________________________
>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
>
>
>