[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Why only jagat is mithya and jeeva is brahman !!??
bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
Mon Apr 11 22:55:15 CDT 2016
I posted below mail before ugAdi but not appeared in the list stating the reason that mail size exceeded…Hence reposting after deleting some extra comments to reduce the size.
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
praNAms Sri Venkatraghavan prabhuji
There are several problems with your email and the arguments in this long and at times frustrating discussion:
Ø If my mails causing you frustration, kindly ignore it prabhuji. Sorry for the inconvenience caused to you in this regard. At the risk of repetition I would like to clarify certain points with regard to your observations ☺
1) First you have not represented what Shankaracharya is saying in mANDUkya bhAshya correctly.
Ø I have already said about the backdrop from which I am approaching the mAndUkya mantra but you are unnecessarily blaming me ☺
He says: advaitam bhedavikalparahitam chaturtham turIyam manyante *pratIyamAnapAdatrayarUpavailakshaNyAt*.
Ø I am afraid you have not completely understood avasthAtraya prakriya as per shankara siddhAnta. In the mAndUkya mantra 3 where there is a talk about vAishwAnarAtma jeeva is vyashti and vaishwAnarAtma is samashti, please refer ahaMvaishvAnarObhUtvA prANiNAm dehamAshritaH. He is (pratyagAtma) the Prathama pAda of paramAtma likewise tejasa (svapna) prAjnA (sushupti) are 2nd and 3rd pAda respectively and tureeyaM is the 4th pAda (sOyamAtma chatushpAt. From the tureeya point of view whatever seen / experienced in other three avasthA-s is kalpita only hence shruti calls these three states as svapna. trayaH svapnAH (itareya shruti). The prapancha pravilaya in this process of avasthAtraya prakriya is : the gross vaishvAnara is to be sublimated in the sUkshma taijasa, this subtle taijasa in whom stUla vaishvAnara already sublimated should be sublimated in the sUkshma tama prAjnA and finally this prAjnA sublimated in sUkshmAtisUkshma pratyagAtma tureeya. Then the imagined katrutvaM and jnAtrutvaM are totally destroyed and he gets identified with the Atman of the nature of neti neti . taM savAtmAnaM pratyagAtmani upasaMhrutya drashturhe drashtabhAvaM netinetityAtmAnaM tureeyaM pratipadyate. To realize this tureeya bhava we have to get up or wake up from all the tree states because all are transient when compared to our sva-svarUpa i.e. tureeya. Just as the ajnAni gets up from the dream and realizes that I am unnecessarily exited there is no reason for this. All the transactions were only imagined within me in dream state. Similarly the mumukshu has to get the right understanding that I am experiencing pleasure and pains from the transactions in the three states. There is no basis for this all the transactions are only imagined in me. I am indeed the brahman which is the upAdAna for the whole jagat in jAgrat ☺ (sorry for the Nth time repetition ) and transactions are possible only in the effects and not in the cause. Of course, I am in the effects as upAdAna but there are no effects in me. mastAni sarvabhUtAni, na cha matstAni bhUtAni.
Ø In short when it has been overlooked the kArya in brahman it is called parabrahman’s svarUpa jnana and without overlooking the nAma rUpa of jagat it is called sarvAtmabhAva. Though it was said that sarvAtmabhAva is non-difference with tolerance of difference (bheda sahishNu abheda, advaita despite seeing the dvaita in Sri Sada prabhuji’s words) it should not be understood that sarvAtmabhAva contains the transaction of difference. It was intended to drive home the point that nAma rUpa and their transactions in jAgrat avasthA are non-different from Atman.
Please note my emphasis on the word pratIyamAna - shankarAchArya very clearly says that the other states are only appearances- therefore, from this, jAgrat prapaNcha is also an appearance only!!
Ø Creation of Ishwara which is universally perceived in the waking state such as AkAsha are objective, the dream creation is not objective and publicly transactionable. The dream world is indeed unreal, there is not even an iota of reality in it. And even the forms are indeed of the nature of the cause because there cannot be an effect coming into existence, if it is not of the nature of cause!! Wondering who said all these?? Shankara at various places. Prabhuji without reconciling all these we cannot selectively pick one verse from mAndUkya and declare jagat is kalpita.
Is this not a clear statement by ShankarAchArya to justify his view of jagat as simply an appearance??
Ø I am really surprised out of whole prasthAna traya bhAshya you are selectively picking one bhAshya vAkya and announcing that jagat is mithyA whereas I have been showing plenty of verses from shruti and bhAshya to reconcile that kArya is nothing but kAraNa in its svarUpa but there is no kArya in kAraNa hence in parabrahman / tureeya there is abhAva of jAgarita sthAna dharma-s. From this view point don’t you think both views ( i.e.jAgat is mithya and jagat is brahman) can be reconciled effectively??
So what? To say that satyatvam of kAraNa proves the satyatvam of the kAryam is plainly wrong -
Ø You blame this on shankara because it is shankara who says Even the forms are indeed of the nature of the cause, because there cannot be an effect coming into existence, IF IT IS NOT OF THE NATURE OF THE CAUSE.
even a mithyA vastu can have a "satya" kAraNa.
Ø Kindly pardon me prabhuji, that is your perception without any base. You are attributing mithyatva to jagadAkAra whereas I am attributing mithyatva to jagat vyavahAra due to avidyA. By the way if the jagat as it is adhyArOpita on brahman then jeeva as he is too adhyArOpita on brahman since brahman ultimate adviteeya and nirvikAra, in that case why jeeva only is brahman and jagat is not brahman but mithya ?? Don’t you think jeeva svarUpa too parikalpita or illusory?? After all this discussion started why jeeva is brahman and jagat is mithyA is it not??
Take the svapna prapaNcha example. The adhishthAna of the svapna prapaNcha is the relatively more "satya" sleeper. The vyAvahArika satya sleeper is the abhinna nimittopAdAna kAraNa of the svapna prapancha. Can you use his vyAvahArika satyatvam of the sleeper to argue that the svapna prapancha is vyAvahArika satyam?? Clearly not. Therefore, you cannot Brahman's kAraNatva of jagat as a reason to argue for jagat's satyatva.
Ø It is because of this reason shankara while arguing with vijnAnavAdins upheld the reality of jAgrat prapancha over svapna prapancha. The later is sublated but the former is not subject to sublation. And it is because of this reason shankara insists that there is no smell of pAramArthika satya in svapna prapancha.
2) Thirdly, I don't know why you keep repeating that the jagat is indriya vedya for the jnAni, because *no one* is saying that it is *not*.
Ø Then please listen to my contention carefully, jagat is not mithyA darshana for the jnAni it is satya darshana only in his sarvAtma bhava.
Let us be very clear here. Everyone is saying that you continue seeing the world after jnAna, what we are arguing with is your mistaken belief that just because you can see something, and experience something, that is evidence of that thing's reality!!
Ø My dear prabhuji please note I am not attributing this reality to the jagat and jagat vyavahAra, it is bhAshyakAra himself doing it. I have given plenty of quotes with regard to this from shruti and bhAshya. jnAni’s perception of jagat is satya darshana not mithyA darshana as you are insisting. Atleast make an attempt to understand what other party saying with regard to this before accusing other for the twisting and turning of bhAshya vAkya-s.
Just because I see sunrise and sunset phenomena, the reality of sunrise and sunset is not proven. There is no sunrise or sunset really, what you are observing is not real - your mere observation does not make that thing real.
Ø That again proves that the vyavahAra i.e. sun rise and sun set is avidyA kalpita but not the sun itself is avidyA kalpita..Atleast now hope you get my point.
You then go on to claim that you are not compelling anyone to accept it. Sure, you are not doing so - but please do not claim that "Shankara never said that jagat is mithyA" or twist his words to your siddhAnta.
Ø Comments like this would produce more heat than light hence I would restrain myself from commenting on it. You are welcome to have an opinion on me prabhuji. Who am I to stop it ☺
Doing so, you then claim that there is no evidence of jagat mithyAtvam anywhere in prasthAna traya bhAshyam.
Ø Your observations would have been better served had you avoided your personal opinion on me ☺ Anyway, what is mithya according to my books of vedAnta I have clarified already. If it is not understood by you properly then it is not your mistake it is my mistake only..poor communication skills ☺ So, to set the records straight, you may kindly be once again noted that I am not saying there is no mithyA pratipAdana with regard to jagat in shankara’s prasthAna but what I am saying or trying to convey is mithyatva cannot be attributed to srushti for which brahman is the reason, mithyatva can be attributed to the jagat which is avdiyA kalpita by jeeva.
It appears to me that you have already decided your position - this is not a dispassionate, objective seeking of the truth. So be it, to each his own.
Ø Thanks once again for your understanding and pardon me for driving your good-self into the realm of frustration.
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list