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

[Bhaskar YR]

I've not identified jagat as mithyA. Jagat in its swaroopa is the same for everything in the jagat, which includes the Jeeva and Ishvara. That swaroopa is called brahman. The VikAra is only in appearance not in its swaroopa.

praNAms
Hare Krishna

Does cloth exist apart from cotton??  Does cloth has separate existence apart from cotton??  For the cloth cotton is the upAdAna kAraNa and cloth in its sthitikAla does not have any independent existence apart from cotton since for the cloth, cotton is the svarUpa.  Whereas cotton can have its own existence even though there is nonexistence of cloth (vikAra).  Where was the cloth then before its creation??  The cloth was there in cotton in the form of cotton only.  Sri Dayananda Saraswati gives this cotton-cloth example  in pUrNamadaH article.  

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar



-----Original Message-----
From: Advaita-l [mailto:advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org] On Behalf Of Aurobind Padiyath via Advaita-l
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 9:52 AM
To: H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Why only jagat is mithya and jeeva is brahman !!??

Sri Chandramouliji

"if you were to add , after Brahman “ which is nirvikAra “ to which I presume you agree, you have indeed identified jagat as mithya because that is the definition of mithya. But unfortunately at the same time you say jagat is not mithya also."

■ I've not identified jagat as mithyA. Jagat in its swaroopa is the same for everything in the jagat, which includes the Jeeva and Ishvara. That swaroopa is called brahman. The VikAra is only in appearance not in its swaroopa. That's why Acharya keeps saying DhyayateEva LelayateEva. The term Eva is the catch which is being missed out.
Regards
Aurobind



On Wed, 27 Apr 2016 09:42 H S Chandramouli, <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> Sri Aurobind Ji,
>>
>>
>>
>> Reg your observation  << Both the jnAni and others are seeing exactly 
>> everything the same way it is
>>
> existing. Only difference is that the jnAni knows everything is 
> brahman
>>
> only where as for others they do not know that.>>,
>>
>>
>>
>> if you were to add , after Brahman “ which is nirvikAra “ to which I 
>> presume you agree, you have indeed  identified jagat as mithya 
>> because that is the definition of mithya. But unfortunately at the 
>> same time you say jagat is not mithya also.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards and Pranams
>>
>
> --

Aurobind
_______________________________________________
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