[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Why only jagat is mithya and jeeva is brahman !!??

[sreenivasa murthy]

Dear Participants on the above stated subject,
       What is the phala one gets by these long drawn out discussions? Is it to sharpen one's arguing capacity? Does it lead to the final goal of Vedanta Viz. Atmajnana (ಆತ್ಮಜ್ಞಾನ) or does it take one away from it? I request the learned members to clarify the above stated doubts of mine.With warm and respectful regards,Sreenivasa Murthy
 


      From: Sunil Bhattacharjya via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 To: Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>; Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> 
Cc: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 Sent: Thursday, 31 March 2016 11:36 AM
 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Why only jagat is mithya and jeeva is brahman !!??
   
Dear Venkataraghavanji,

To understand the dictum "Jagat Mithya" is not an easy thing for many. In the times of Adi Shankara, there was neither Internet and nor the yahoo groups and that is why the ancient greats like Adi Shankara did not make everything explicit in writing, as explicit one wants in todays Internet  replies. Many things were taught with the disciple  facing the guru. It is said that what guru breathes out  becomes the in-breadth of the disciple and vice versa. Such was the momentary merging of the Guru and the Shishya and the guru could also touch the disciple to give the disciple a spiritual touch. I am sure that in such solemn moments between the guru and the disciple, the guru let the disciple understand that  that one should first meditate on Ishvara, the Saguna Brahman and at the point of the Jnani disciple's merging with the Saguna Brahman, the latter did advice the disciple to concentrate on His (Ishvara's) Nirguna state and that is in a way telling that saguna roop at any level is not the ultimate state, call it whatever you like Mithya or Impemanent or Non-Eternal. Though the Lord had taken the Saguna roopa,  the Lord is is basically the One without a second  and is the Changeless Nirguna Brahman. That is why in the  Muktikopanishad the Lord Rama advised his greatest devotee and mahajnani Hanuman to meditate on His (the Lord's) Nirguna state. The Bhagavata Purana also  says that the Lord Himself gives the Jnana (the Advaita Jnana) to the ardent disciple. So this needed discussion is really as short as what the Lord Ram told Hauman  or the Bhagavata purana (the Vangmayee roopa of Lord Krishna) told us the readers.

Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya

Sunil K.  BHattacharjya


--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 3/30/16, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Why only jagat is mithya and jeeva is brahman !!??
 To: "Ravi Kiran" <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
 Cc: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 Date: Wednesday, March 30, 2016, 10:24 AM
 
 Yes. Sri Bhaskar's
 contention is that jagat is Brahman. I see three ways
 for that to hold good:
 
 1) There is no difference between jagat and
 Brahman. If there is no
 difference then
 jagat is simply nAma rUpa, which is mithyA. This ends up
 proving the opposite of Bhaskarji's
 contention.
 
 2) There is a
 difference between kArya jagat and kAraNa Brahman. If
 there
 is a difference then how is jagat
 Brahman? Further, if there is a real
 difference, and we somehow say that jagat is
 Brahman, this implies svagata
 bheda in
 Brahman. This option is not possible as that is shruti
 viruddha
 (neha nAnAsti kinchana) and yukti
 viruddha (we start off saying jagat is
 Brahman and end up proving jagat isn't
 Brahman).
 
 3) There is a
 difference in vyavahAra but no difference in paramArtha
 between jagat and Brahman. Put like this, the
 difference between Brahman
 and jagat itself
 is sadasat vilakshaNam. So the next question is, is that
 difference mithyA or satyam? To answer that
 question we have to go through
 the same 3
 options, and if we reject the first 2 of the options for
 the
 same reasons as above, we have to posit
 a second difference that is sadasat
 vilakshaNa too, and so on so forth, leading to
 infinite regress. So the
 more we try to
 define jagat, the more it eludes description, leaving us
 to
 conclude that all we can say about jagat
 is that it is mithyA and leave it
 at
 that.
 
 Not sure if all that
 makes sense, but that's my understanding of the
 topic.
 
 Regards
 Venkatraghavan
 On 30 Mar 2016 3:29 p.m.,
 "Ravi Kiran" <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
 wrote:
 
 > Namaste
 >
 > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016
 at 7:45 PM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
 > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 wrote:
 >
 >> Thanks
 Bhaskar ji.
 >>
 >> <<First of all as I have been
 reiterating the jagat which is Ishwara
 >> hetuka, the jagat for which brahman is
 abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa, the
 >>
 jagat / kArya which is like kAraNa trishu kAleshu na
 vyabhicharati, that
 >> jagat which has
 been pointed out by shruti as brahma (like sarvaM
 >> khalvidam
 >>
 brahman, brahmaivedaM vishwaM etc.)  is not
 mithyA.>>
 >>
 >> This jagat that you refer to as not
 mithyA, is Brahman. What you are
 >>
 merely
 >> doing is attributing a name
 called jagat to this Brahman and saying that
 >> the "name" is non different
 to brahman,
 >
 >
 > Yes, this is exactly what I understood
 also from all the posts from
 > Bhaskar-ji
 and commented so, in one of the earlier emails ..
 >
 > If this Atmaikatva
 jnana (as he says) is extended further to a different
 > realm ( as in jnAni's vyavahAra he
 quotes - whatever he does is
 > satyameva,
 his vyavahAra with this jagat  is satyameva ), I see the
 > dilution (avidya kalpita) ...
 >
 > which is just a
 tautology -
 >> anything in your
 conception of jagat, other than a mere name, would imply
 >> a
 >> difference
 from Brahman, and there can be no svagata bheda in
 Brahman.
 >>
 >>
 <<The jagat which is independent of its kAraNa is
 mithyA, since this
 >> mithyA
 >> jagat is in reality not possible to
 exist it is mithyA only. >>
 >>
 >> Then your
 conception of mithyA is just Atyantika asat, not sadasat
 >> vilakshaNa mithyA.
 >>
 >> <<jnana
 does not bring bhedAkAra nivrutti, it only bring bheda
 buddhi
 >> nivrutti.  brahmavidyA does
 not create or destroy a thing in front says
 >> shankara in bruhadAraNyaka.>>
 >> Yes, Bhaskarji. We don't state
 that the AkAra of jagat is destroyed by
 >> jnAna. However, what is bheda buddhi
 nivrutti actually mean? Since AkAra
 >>
 is
 >> the thing that is
 "perceptible", bheda buddhi nivrutti means 
 bhedAkAra
 >> satyatva nivrutti. And if
 the satyatva of bhedAkAra is negated, what is
 >> left? Only Brahman.
 >>
 >> <<Not
 only antaryAma /AdhAra / AdhishtAna he (brahman) is the
 upAdAna too
 >> for this vyAvahArika
 objects. That we should not forget while throwing the
 >> vyAvahArika jagat in mithyA
 basket.>>
 >>
 >> This is just a provisional status.
 Initially we say brahman is the upAdAna
 >> for the vyAvahArika objects, but in
 reality, its upAdAna status is also
 >>
 adhyAropita only, it is mithyA also. In apavAda, even this
 upAdAnatvam is
 >> negated as mithyA.
 That is why Krishna says "na cha matsthAni
 bhUtAni".
 >>
 >> <<If we discount the
 kArya-kAraNa ananyatvaM, if we negate the Ishwara
 >> hetuka srushti, if we deny the
 pancheekaraNa, trivrukkaraNa just to prove
 >> the illusory nature of jagat we have
 to ignore major portion of sUtra,
 >>
 geeta and shruti and without our knowledge unfortunately we
 are wearing
 >> the
 >> attire of vijnAnavAdins when it comes
 to jagat existence. >>
 >>
 >> It is simply part of adhyAropa-apavAda
 prakriyA. We are not vijnAnavAdis,
 >>
 because they say that jagat is a projection of the mind,
 whereas we say it
 >> is a projection
 of avidyA. By the way, by avidyA, I mean brahmAshrita
 >> avidyA.
 >>
 >> Regards,
 >>
 Venkatraghavan
 >>
 _______________________________________________
 >> 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
 >>
 >
 >
 _______________________________________________
 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
_______________________________________________
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