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

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms
Hare krishna

Will Jnani see ornaments and gold both or gold only? 

>  jnAni will  see the golden ornament...does it mean to say jnAni would see the vikAra in brahman??  No, it is just because the gold is OtaprOta in all the ornaments irrespective of its size and shape.  

If he sees both there will be Dvaita because there is ornament with Nama Rupa and gold. 

>  jnAni would realize that there is no separate existence for this ornament apart from gold but in gold there is no shapes of ornaments.  The effect is not different from the cause, but the cause is different from the effect.  

He must see gold only. Similarly for Jnani there is only Brahman. He cannot see Nama Rupa Jagat. 

>  Yes, he would see gold only in kAryAkAra, it is because of this for the jnAni kAryAkAra and related vyavahAra too satyameva from its sadrUpa.  The effect (nAma rUpa) is available for transactions, i.e. for example from the gold ornaments created like ring, bangle, necklace, bracelet etc. it has its own shape,  design, size and usage as well.  And later on these ornaments can be melted and we can make a different ornament from that melted gold.  Now tell me at what time these ornaments existed apart from gold??  Before the creation of ornaments, after melting of ornaments and when the ornaments existing in different shape and size, all these trishu kAleshu these ornaments donot have existence apart from gold.  But here key point is gold is not created (shankara in chAndOgya bhAshya calls this as mrut sAmAnya which is invariably existing in mrutpinda and mrudghata) it is neither big nor small, nor bracelet nor ring and mere gold (mrutsAmAnya) is not available for any type of vyavahAra, hence mere gold (nirvishesha brahman) is vyavahArAteeta but when the same gold in kAryAkAra available for the vyavahAra in its sadrUpa.  Hence in shruti it has been clearly said : Before its creation when the forms and names were not yet distinguished, the jagat was available only for one expression and understanding viz. Atman, NOW, (i.e. after creation) at the time of stithikAla ( sustenance, i.e. after the forms and names carved out) it is at once available NOT ONLY for several expressions and understandings, but also for the single expression and understanding i.e. Atman.  Hence it would be better to say the jnAni would see at the nAma rUpa jagat as Atmameva..And it is NOT vyavahAra abhAva jnana it is vyavahAra bAdhita samyaK jnana in which state sravaM cha nAmarUpAdi sadAtmanaiva satyaM vikAra jAtaM svatastu anrutameva.  All the names and forms are real only with reference to their cause, but independently by themselves (this is called parichinna drushti of aviveki-s) they are unreal.  

It is like the snake rope example. When you have Ajnana you will see Snake but when that Ajnana disappears you will see Rope only. You cannot see the snake. That snake was Mithya.

>  but as I said earlier, jagat is NOT mithya like sarpa on the rope.  

Problem with your logic is you are not understanding Brahman is cause for Jagat but it is Vivarta Cause. Therefore when Kaarana is known there will be no Kaarya. When rope is known there is no snake. If snake is still there you have not understood rope.

>  whether for the jagat brahman is vivartOpadAna kAraNa or pariNAmi kAraNa fact remains that kArya is non different from kAraNa but kAraNa has no effect in itself.  I have agreed that there is no nAnA in brahman ( neha nAnAsti kiMchana) but these nAnArUpa donot have existence of their own apart from brahman.  Since for the nAnA brahman is the abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa we cannot categorically declare jagat is mithya (which is pratyaksha pramANa gOchara) and jeeva is brahman ( nAnAvidha jeeva-s too pratyaksha).  This partiality does not make any sense when we are accepting the kAraNatvaM of brahman to this jagat.  

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar