[Advaita-l] Real vs. Unreal

rajaramvenk at gmail.com rajaramvenk at gmail.com
Thu Dec 12 00:25:31 CST 2013

I think the scholars are missing my question or argument. Let me re-phrase for clarity. We don't need sastras or a guru to determine a. I exist or b. The world is not what it appears to be. My existence is self - evident to me. I know that a pot is clay, which in turn is made of elements, which in turn is form of energy. A pot is not what it appears to be. I need sastras only to tell me of things I can't know otherwise - the future effect of dharma and adharma, existence of unseen realities such as devas and Ishwara. 

The world is not what it appears to be but the question is whether it has existence or not is the question. The inevitability of the experience of a pot even for a jnani makes us wonder whether his conclusion that the world was never created and does not exist is true. If we see water on a desert land during summer afternoon, we will think its a mirage but if we see it even after the sun sets (equivalent of dawn of knowledge), will we say that there's no water? 
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

-----Original Message-----
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <svidyasankar at hotmail.com>
Sender: "Advaita-l" <advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 22:05:51 
To: Advaita List<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Reply-To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
 <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Real vs. Unreal

> Dear all,
> Let me add my 2 cents views on the subject of Mithya which i understand fro
> VMjis mail has been discussed elaborately earlier.
> Mithya has no doubt many definitions like nonindependant, nonpermanent etc.
> But i think for understanding its implications it is useful to understand
> it as a mixture of real ( that is vastu ) and unreal ( that is a-vastu )
> . When we see a pot we say the "pot is".When we see a cloth we say " cloth
> is ". Similarly " creation is ". 


Yes, this mixture of the really real and the other is indeed the crucial meaning
of mithyAtva. The taittirIya upanishad says, "satyaM ca anRtaM ca satyam
abhavat. yad idaM kiM ca." Accordingly, Sankara bhagavatpAda uses the term
"satyAnRte maithunIkRtya" in the sUtrabhAshya. What SAstra helps us do is to
separate out the satya from the anRta that come to us in a mixed way in all
our sensory experiences.


Best regards,

Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/

To unsubscribe or change your options:

For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list