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

[Ravi Kiran]

praNAms Sri Bhaskarji

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> praNAms Sri Ravi Kiran prabhuji
>
> Hare Krishna
>
>
>
> Ø   Sorry for the belated reply.  Bit busy at office work.
>
>
>
> Understood behind all your expressions, you are trying to highlight the
> significance of having samyak or brahmaikatva  ekamevAdvitIya advaita
> paramArtha jnAna for experiencing *krta*-*krtyata ..  *this is expressed
> in so many ways as jnAni seeing satyatvam only, there is no avidya kalpita
> bhEdha drushti or kartrutva/bhoktrutva in jnAni and so-on etc
>
>
>
> Ø   Thanks for your understanding of my position.  There are plenty of
> references in shankara bhAshya with regard to this, we cannot simply sit in
> the seat of sAkshi and negate everything by calling it as mithyA.  As I
> have been reiterating, jnAni’s darshna is not mithyA (anAtma) darshana, it
> is satya (sarvAtmakatvaM) darshana only.  In this samyak jnana, the jnAni
> would not think that  as a sAkshi (witness) he is the only reality and
> everything else is ‘mithyA’ from his sAkshi seat.
>
>From your response, understand that you are trying to clear any
misconceptions regarding samyak jnAna..

Yes, there is no question of "everything else" in samyak jnAna

If one holds any division such as sAkshi - sAkshyam in samyak jnAna, such
an understanding seems incomplete




> What is that he would realize as mithyA is ‘bheda buddhi’ which is avidyA
> janita and it is not bhedAkAra.  bhAhyAkArabhedabuddhi nivruttireva
> AtmasvarUpAvalaMbana kAraNam says geeta bhAshyakAra.
>

Yes,  Atma svarUpa jnAna is highlighted

> The very mOksha phala is ‘kriyAkAraka phala shUnyaM, there is complete
> absence of avidyAdi kAmakarma clarifies shankara in bruhat bhAshya :
> sarvAtmabhAvO mOkshO vidyAphalaM kriyAkArakaphala shUnyaM…yatra avidyAdi
> kAmakarmANi na saNti.
>

Yes, sadyo-mukti through brahmaikatva jnAna is advocated in bhAshya..

>
>
> The approach you have taken to express this underlying position of yours
> quoting Sruti / bhAshya refs, has resulted in many responses/comments from
> all members on this thread.. this is just my view..
>
>
>
> Ø   Though in all my responses I maintained the position that there is NO
> kAryAkAra bheda in kAraNa, since this kAraNa ultimately nirvishesha and
> nirvikAra but at the same time there is no separate existence to kArya
> apart from kAraNa to justify the kAryAkAraNa ananyataM and adhyArOpaM,
> prabhuji-s are still finding  fault in this position and trying to push
> this approach outside traditional boundaries.  That is quite unfortunate.
>
> Ø   Anyway, thanks for feedback prabhuji.
>
>
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>
> bhaskar
>
>
>
>
>