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

Bhaskar YR bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
Tue Apr 5 00:19:50 CDT 2016

praNAms Sri Venkatraghavan prabhuji & other prabhuji-s
Hare Krishna

Due to hectic first quarter end work at office I was not able to reply in time to so many posts on this topic (yes it is indeed so many ☺).  Kindly pardon me for that.  Today I would try to address some of those.  And as I said before, I would like to ignore the mails which is not directly contributing to this topic and having unwarranted personal comments.

<<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, 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.

Ø   Yes, this repetition is required to question / doubting the famous open declaration that jagat is mithyA.  Shruti / bhAshya saying something else when dealing with jagat svarUpa.  Attributing  the independent existence to  name and form apart from its upAdAna and nimitta is not the intention of shruti / bhAshya.  And whenever shruti / bhAshya says brahman is everything it is because of the fact that socalled nAma rUpa satyameva as its content is nothing but brahman anrutameva when it has been treated as an independent entity.  And with regard to svagata bheda in brahman, kindly note the shankara bhAshya : brahma svabhAvO hi prapanchaH na prapancha svabhAvaM brahma and ananyatvepi kAryakAraNayOH kAryasya kAraNAtmatvaM “ na tu kAraNasya kAryAtmatvaM”.  Ring and bangles gold only and there is no ring or bangle when there is no gold in it since gold is the both efficient and material cause of this ring and bangle whereas gold itself is not ring or bangle as it does not have svagata bheda.  It is because of this reason only vedAnta says kArya after praLaya merges in brahman in its ‘kAraNa rUpa’ as avyAkruta/ avyakta only not as kAryAkAra vyakta rUpa to maintin the nirvishesha, nirguNatva of 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.

Ø   tattvAnyatvAbhyAm has been attributed to mAya not to avidyA kalpita mithyA of jeeva.  For that matter I am not the party with those who treat both avidyA and mAya as synonyms.  mAyA which is Shakti of brahman is brahmAbhinna when it comes to creation and related issues.  And as I said that which we have already decided as ‘mithyA’ cannot be redefined as ‘anirvachaneeya’.  It is because of the fact that to say anything ‘anirvachaneeya’ at the first place that thing should exist and the svarUpa of that existence needs to be arrived through pratyaksha or shAstra.  It is related to kArya-kAraNa, Shakti-shakta prakriya.  Whereas when we already consider that something (jagat in this case) as mithyA  that mithyA vastu cannot be ‘anirvachaneeya’ at the same time, because mithyA jagat is kevala jeeva mAnasa pratyaya and it always remains as mithyA only.  More details on this we can have at some other time.

<<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.

Ø   Yes, this is what the whole contention of this thread.  jagadAkAra in its kAraNa rUpa does not go anywhere after the dawn of samyak jnana i.e. even after knowing the svarUpa kAryAkAra continue to exist hence jagat itself is not mithyA.  What is then mithyA here in this kAryAkAra vyaktAtmaka jagat??  Looking at the kAryAkAra apart from brahman and attributing independent existence to it due to avidyA is mithyA. That is reason why when shruti / bhAsya talking about brahma kArya jagat, asserts  : bahusyAM prajAyeya yathA mrudghatAdyAkAreNa it does not continue to clarify buddhi parikalpitena to label brahma kArya as mithyA.  In short bhedAkAra is brahma mAnasa pratyaya for which brahman itself abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa whereas bheda buddhi in bhedAkAra and resultant vyavayAra is kevala jeeva mAnasa pratyaya due to his anAdirananta avidyA.  And this jeeva’s anyathA jnAna’s jneya is mithyA jagat that would go after the dawn of samyak jnana or Atmaikatva darshana.

<<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.

Ø     Kindly give me the shankara bhAshya / shruti quote where it has been said that brahman’s nimittA & upAdAna kAraNa both are mithyA when jnAni continues to have the vyavahAra in his Atmaikatva jnana.  When the shurit insists mruttiketyeva satyaM it implies that there is mrutsAmAnya (kAraNa) in mrutvikAra and mrutsAmAnya is what vivartOpadAna to whatever is mruNmaya.  If we deny this very existence of mrutsAmAnya in mruNmaya kArya and saying that mrutsAmAnya itself is adhyArOpita we are, I am afraid  heading towards Buddhist shUnyavAda.

In apavAda, even this upAdAnatvam is negated as mithyA. That is why Krishna says "na cha matsthAni bhUtAni".

Ø   Yes, in gold / clay there is no upAdAna or nimitta vyavahAra whereas for the ornaments / pot gold / clay is the ONLY both kAraNa-s.  I am in all but nothing is there in me is the lord’s declaration in geeta.

<<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.

Ø   brahmAshrita avidyA !!??  Anyway I am not going to dwell on this topic right now but in short as I said above, according to me mAya and avidyA are not synonyms in my Advaita dictionary ☺

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list