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

[Venkatraghavan S]

Agreed. Sadly no final verdict is possible as both sides are convinced that
they are right.

Regards
Venkatraghavan
On 27 Apr 2016 10:26 p.m., "Shashwata Shastri" <shashwata.unimas at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste to All,
>
> This long dragged discussion demands a final verdict. I have went through
> many of the mails. All it seems , is the same point being risen again and
> again. An infinite loop of word jugglery, sadly nothing else.
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
> <#m_-1222421713617073333_DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> Shashwata Chowdhury
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> Namaste Sri Sastry,
>>
>> In addition to Sri Sadananda ji's reply, here are my 2 cents.
>>
>> Acharya has answered this very question in AdhyAsa BhAshya:
>>
>> न चायमस्ति नियमः — पुरोऽवस्थित एव विषये विषयान्तरमध्यसितव्यमिति ;
>> अप्रत्यक्षेऽपि ह्याकाशे बालाः तलमलिनतादि अध्यस्यन्ति |
>>
>> There is no rule that one can superimpose things on only that vastu which
>> is pratyaksha - for even on an apratyaksha AkAsha, children superimpose
>> dirt (colour) / surface (concavity) etc.
>>
>> 2) The same example can be used to answer the requirement for similarity.
>> What similarity exists between concavity (ie form) and a formless AkAsha,
>> between colour and colourless AkAsha? None, but adhyAsa still happens.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Venkatraghavan
>> On 27 Apr 2016 4:26 p.m., "kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l" <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>
>> PraNAms - answered below.
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> On Wed, 4/27/16, Ramachandra Sastry <ramachandra.sastry at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>  Namaste,
>>  I have a
>>  query on Adhisthana (substratam) of Jagat being Brahman,
>>  request scholars to explain please.
>>  1) When we say the serpent that is
>>  seen is only an illusion due to Avidya, we can determine
>>  whether the Adhisthana is a rope or a crack in the ground by
>>  Pratyaksha, Similarly if Brahman were an object for
>>  Pratyaksa then we could determine whether or not it is the
>>  Adhisthana for the illusory Jagat, however, Brahman is not a
>>  matter of Pratyaksa at all and only the Jagat is seen,
>>  therefore it might be not possible to say whether it's
>>  Adisthana is Brahman or some think else?
>>
>> Ans: Yes - you are right - Hence to know that Brahman is the adhishTanam
>> of
>> the jagat - Scripture alone is pramaana. or means of knowledge, since
>> Brahman by definition is imperceptible.For that Vedanta alone is pramaana-
>> where creation is discussed.
>>
>>  2)  How can formless Brahman be
>>  Adhishthana for the illusory forms, because there must be
>>  resemblance between the illusion and it's Adhisthana
>>  when it is not possible to imagine a snake in a shell or
>>  silver in a rope, how can the forms of the Jagat be imagined
>>  in the formless Brahman
>>
>> Ans: Brahman being infinite cannot have form. The formless Brahman can
>> appear with many forms - just as formless mind projects many forms in the
>> dream world that you create. Hence to know the absolute truth which cannot
>> be perceived nor can be deduced by logic - one has to approach a teacher
>> and study Vedanta - says the scriptures. - tat vijnaanaartham guruam eva
>> abhigachchet says Mundaka Up. tat viddhi praNipaatena pariprashnena sevaya
>> - says Krishna. One need to study Vedanta under a competent teacher - a
>> competent teacher is one who studied vedanta under another competent
>> teacher - all the way to the Lord.
>>
>> Hari Om!
>> Sadananda
>>
>>  RegardsRamachandra Sastry
>>
>>
>>  On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at
>>  7:58 PM, kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>>  wrote:
>>
>>
>>  PraNAms
>>
>>
>>
>>  After posting I recognized that Shree venkatraghavanji
>>  already discussed the issue - I essentially agree what he
>>  has stated.
>>
>>
>>
>>  Hari Om!
>>
>>  Sada
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>>
>>  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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>