Sati Shankar studiesggroup at gmail.com
Thu Apr 28 10:42:42 CDT 2016

I feel lucky having joined this group, at least I reached a place where
some meaningful discussion is going on.
Many of the variations which we encounter are due to semantics*, mithyA* is
never an illusion nor "False" as we encounter in textbook and general
texts. When I started studying, found AchArya Shankar himself has said he
had been saying what has been already there and this led me go backward
right to Rig Veda.and  hence started reconsidering most of the core as a
facet of continuity. same applies to unity and duality also.
I can not be comprehensive here is a short note:
Let us consider our own tradition;
In our Sanatan tradition,  whatever we perceive, the form and name it,*
nAma -  rUpa*, is realised in our tradition as *vishvam ekam*, (RV.
3.54.8), the many are the One  and the One that is manifold, *vishvam
satyam*, (RV. 2.24.12); the manifold truth,and *vishvam .....garbham* (RV.
10.121.7). therefore, if asked, "Is He One or many?", our tradition
says,"One and many", The general principle is ,the *devah* is every where
of one and the same form. (RV.8.11.8)., that is, "Even as he seems, so is
he named" (RV. 5.44.6)., the way being *anurUpah*, *pratirUpah,*
(JBU.I.27). So how can there be a part *satyam *and  an other* mithyA?* Here,
He, *PrajApati,* manifests in "Himself", so this universe, *idam sarvam*,
pecieved according to *anurUpam, pratirUpam*,to be declared " One and
many". It is the semantic mis-marriage that the translation of the *NasadIya
Sukta*, the Manifestation Hymn, as called the "Creation Hymn", which
signifies the error interpretation and naming by the Indologists had in
their minds the "Creationist presuppositions" of Christianity. Therefore,
using the "God" for the  "Self. Manifested",* idam sarvam*, is like
limiting Him and equally makes "theology" a term unfit to proceed for *brahma
jijnAsA* of our tradition.*PrajApti*, thus manifested in Himself,* idam
sarvam*,selforganizes in dharma by his own  multifarious *sva-bhAva,* such
that in Him are all beings, *idam sarvam,- manas, prAnah, nAma-rUpa, *are
within, as coincident; " sent by Him onto him, and born of Him into him, it
is in Him that all this universe is stabilised, that is how our tradition
invokes for *shAnti, ... sarve devAh shAntih, nakshatrh shAntih,
vanaspatayah shantih.....aum shAntih, shAntih, shAntih..*. to keep the
equilibrium  in *idam sarvam* intact, for welfare of the cosmos. Our
scriptures teach,"*idam sarvam brahm*" and therefore, being a manifestation
within,   *Aham brahmAsmi*  since we ,*aikik *and *samyaka *are this "*idam
sarvam*", well connected in such a way that a chance deviation at any
level, be it microcosm or macrocosm, does not leave unaffected within. When
"idam sarvam brahmn" how can there be something called mithyA?

So is the observation by this ignorant.
 Sati Shankar.

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> praNAms
> Hare Krishna
> First of all my heartfelt praNAms to all prabhuji-s who have patiently
> participated in this discussion and shared their thoughts.  After
> exchanging more than 200 mails on this topic, as I promised I am writing
> down my final thoughts on it.  I must say here by no means it is 'the'
> conclusion in Advaita saMpradAya but shared thoughts do have the base in
> shankara bhAshya and shruti.   And more importantly Sri SSS's works too
> somewhere advocated this same view point.  From all these discussion, we
> can flatly conclude that there is no difference of opinion on
> brahmaikatvaM, satyatvaM, nirvisheshatvaM etc.,  there is no difference of
> opinion on availability of this jagat in vyavahAra to each and every one,
> hence jagat astitvaM has been accepted as vyavahArika satta  and again
> there is no difference of opinion about jeeva svarUpa is ultimately brahman
> only (jeevO brahmaiva na apara) in these discussions.  Problem starts for
> us  when one party say for the jagat brahman is the only abhinna
> nimittOpadAna kAraNa hence not mithyA but from its causal form satya only.
> The other party says brahman is the adhishtAnam of this jagat but for the
> jagat brahman is mere vivartOpadAna kAraNa and mAya is the pariNAmi
> kAraNa.  Since there is no svagata bheda we cannot say jagat  is brahman
> and jagat is mithyA only because it is ever changing whereas brahman is
> nirvikAri and nirvishesha.  I think with regard to all these issues we have
> already talked a lot and finally after some mutual agreements and
> disagrements we stuck at one point. i.e. What would be the jnAni's drushti
> of this jagat after realizing his adviteeya svarUpa.  Whether he look at
> the jagat as mithyA or satya??  Since his drushti / realization is what
> shruti and AcharyOpadesha based.  We have to see what shrtuti and
> bhagavatpAda offer with regard to this.  It is true that for the ajnAni-s
> like me/us it is not possible to determine what exactly is the jnAni's
> hrudaya spandana, atleast from the shruti and bhAshya reference we can try
> to understand what would be the perception of jnAni with regard to this
> jagat.  Whether this jagat is satya or mithya.
> First of all, before quoting the shruti and bhAshyakAra, I would like to
> quote couple of references from my parama guruji Sri SSS from one of his
> articles published in 2014 from adhyAtma prakAsha kAryAlaya in monthly
> magazine adhyAtma prakAsha and another one from his minor work 'brahma
> vidyA'.  I am just reproducing the first one i.e. article in adhyAtma
> prakAsha  as it is written in Kannada  :
> // quote //
> haagaadare tattvajnAnavAdamelAdarU prapanchavu mithyeyendu tOruvudO illavO
> ??  Aga mAtra idu mithyeyaagi tOralu kAraNavenu??  endu yaaraadaru shankisa
> bahudu.  idakke uttaravenendare, nijavaagi yaavaagalu prapanchavu
> mithyavendu kaaNisuvude illa.  ekendare Atmanannu bittare prapanchavembudu
> bereyaagi iruvudilla.  ajnAnigaLige avara paramAtma svarUpavu tiLiyadu.
> Addarinda avaru bhinabhinnaraagiruva jeevarugaLannu alli avarugaLu
> vyavaharisuttiruva prapanchavannu kaaNuttiruttaare.  Adare avaru
> AtmasAkshAtkAravannu padedare " idellavu Atmane" emba shrutiya arthavannu
> managANuttaare.  Aga avarige prapanchavu Atmane Agi biduvudarinda adu
> paramasatyavaagi biduttade.
> Addarinda "jagattu mithyeye?? "?  emba prashnege katta kadeya uttaravu
> yaavadaayitu??  adu taaniruva paramArtha rUpadalli Atmane, brahmave.
> Addarinda adu nijavaagiye satyavaagide hIge nOdidare yaavadondU mithyave
> alla.  ajnAnigaLige tOruttiruva brahma bhinnavaada jagattembudu illave
> illa; Addarinda adannu satyavendaagali, mithyavendaagali vingadisuvudakke
> kaaraNavilla.  jagattendaadaru kareyiri, brahmavendaadaru kareyiri; iruvudu
> Onde Ondu adviteeyavAda paramArtha satyavu.  adakkinta bereyaagi yaavadondU
> iruvade illa.
> // unquote //
> Those who can read and understand Kannada, above two paragraphs are
> self-explanatory.  And those who donot know Kannada the gist of above
> observation of Sri SSS is about  jnAni's perception of jagat after the
> svarUpa jnana.  Sri SSS poses a question here : After realization whether
> this jagat become mithyA for the jnAni??  And why this jagat would become
> mithyA for the jnAni only after realization??  For this Sri SSS clarifies :
> prapancha (jagat) does not deviate from brahman and does not exist apart
> from brahman.  Only ajnAni-s due to their parichinna jnana would see the
> various jeeva-s and manifold objects and transactions.  When they realize
> they would come to know that 'all this is Atman only'.  Therefore, Sri SSS
> in second pyara concludes :  For the question : is this jagat mithyA??  The
> ultimate answer is :  that (jagat) in its sadrUpa (paramArtha rUpa) Atman
> only brahman only.  Therefore this (jagat) is REAL, FOR THAT MATTER THERE
> IS NOTHING THAT CAN BE CALLED  'MITHYA'.  For the ajnAni-s this jagat would
> appear bhinna from brahman (separate from brahman), that which does not
> exist at all.  Therefore no need for exercise like tattvAnyatvAbhyAm for
> this avidyA kalpita jagat.  Whether you call this jagat or brahman what is
> there is ONLY one and that is paramArtha satya there exists nothing apart
> from it.
> And Sri SSS further clarifies in brahma vidye (again a Kannada book) at
> the end quotes one shruti vAkya : brahma dAshA brahma dAsA brahmaiveme
> kitavAH and advises that realization of this universal truth (sarvatrika
> satya) is the parama purushArtha jnana, janma sAphalya jnana.  Those who
> attain this jnana is dvija Sri SSS quotes manu here.
> And in his various prakaraNa works like jeevanta vedAnta, anubhava
> paryanta vedAnta, mAndUkya rahasya vivruttiH, shAnkara vedAnta,
> Misconceptions about shankara vedAnta etc.  Sri SSS deals with this subject
> and clarifies that sarvAtmakatvaM is what is advocated in shankara's
> Advaita vedAnta and jagan mithyatvaM is not an essential criterial to
> arrive this truth.
> In the next part we shall look into the shruti and shankara bhAshya (
> which I have already covered in my previous mails) to this effect.
> Hari Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
> _______________________________________________
> 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

*Sati Shankar <http://www.satishankar.com>*

Global Synergetic Foundation <http://www.globalsynergetic.org/>
*Social Links:*  Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/drssdutt>  Twitter
<https://twitter.com/satishankar>  G+

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list