[Advaita-l] Real, unreal and mithyaa

[kuntimaddi sadananda]

PraNAms

Perceptual world is not real or unreal. Hence it is called mithyaa which is sat asat vilakshanam.

Real is clearly defined - that which does not undergo any modification - Only infinite cannot undergo any modification, by definition. Brahman is infiniteness itself. Brahman cannot undergo modification. Hence He cannot be the cause for creation since creation involves a modification. 

If there is a creation, then the cause cannot but be Brahman since there is nothing else other than Brahman. But by above statement Brahman cannot be the cause for anything. Hence only way to account the creation since it appears to be real for the perceiver is by adhyaasa that Shree Subbuji mentioned. It is appears to be there but really not there since what is there is only Brahman which cannot be perceived.

Hence whatever is perceived and we think is real is not really real since it is only apparently real.

Unreal cannot even appear for perception - For unreal there is no locus for existence and therefore for experience it has to exist Hence unreal is like vandyaputraH 

The world is experienced - therefore it is neither real not unreal - hence it is called mithyaa.

In fact Shankara says anything that is seen or perceived is mithyaa - dRshyatvaat. 

For these it is not logic but Vedanta is pramAna. Logic relays on Pratyaksha pramANa for validation. That which is beyond the pratyaksha pramANa cannot be established by logic. It is useless to argue using logic on these aspects. 

Hari Om!
Sadananda


--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 12/10/13, Sujal Upadhyay <sujal.u at gmail.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Real vs. Unreal
 To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 Date: Tuesday, December 10, 2013, 7:38 AM
 
 Dear Nitin bhai,
 
 I think unreal does not mean mithyA. Or say what is the
 english word for
 asatya?
 
 Satya = Real / truth
 asatya = ?
 mithyA (in between) = ? - that which is transient
 experience.
 
 My English is poor
 
 Also what is the difference between anitya and mithyA?
 
 According to my understanding, anitya means that which is
 non-self and is
 perishable. So if I destroy a cloth, it's irreversible end
 product is ash,
 which is visible.
 
 While in snake-rope analogy, when snake disappears, it does
 not leave any
 trace, like it's curved path, etc.
 
 Adi Shankara in Tatva Bodh defines both anitya and mithya
 separately.
 
 In Jnana Drishti, the world is negated and not destroyed.
 that is nirvikalp
 samadhi. Then there is another word, satvam khalu-idam
 brahma. 'Idam' :)
 
 Sri Ramana Maharshi says, when you look at shadow, then sun
 is not visible,
 when you look at sun, you cannot see shadow. Similarly, when
 you clearly
 experience this world, you do not experience Brahman. when
 you clearly
 experience Brahman which world is not visible.
 
 Body is Jnani is Jnana itself (consciousness). It is not
 physical body, but
 the substratum of entire universe is his body (i.e.
 Brahman).
 
 Aum
 
 
 OM
 
 Sujal Upadhyay
 _______________________________________________
 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