[Advaita-l] Fwd: Re: What is the difference between Maya and avidhya ?

[Ravi Kiran]

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Ramachandra Achar via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: "Ramachandra Achar" <ramachandraachar2 at gmail.com>
>> Date: 12 Aug 2016 7:02 a.m.
>> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] What is the difference between Maya and avidhya ?
>> To: "V Subrahmanian" <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
>> Cc:
>>
>> Yes, subbu sir ,
>>            I accept because of agnana whatever we see is false,and that
>> object doesn't exist in all three "kaalas",
>> For example snake seen on rope,person seen on dream......
>>
>> I too accept Maya ,which is due to agnana is false and doesn't exist in
>> three  folds of time.
>>
>> But we have accept the existence of agnana in past and present.
>> For example in dream whatever we see maybe false and doesn't exist.....
>> But we have to accept the existence of dream in past and present...
>>
>
> Just like the dream experience is real while one is in dream, and is
> unreal (asatyam)
> upon waking, ajnAna anubhava seems to be real, until Brahma Atmaikatva
> jnAna is attained.
>
>
>> Similarly, agnana of seeing snake in rope  maybe false....
>> But that agnana,which makes me to see snake in rope is not false...it is
>> true and 100% exists...
>
>
Once you realize that only rope existed, will you not conclude that - rope
alone exists in all 3 kAlas,
seeing snake in rope was brAnthi or brama and not yadArtha anubhava..

rope alone is satya, seeing snake in rope (and the experience/effects it
creates) is mithya..


> otherwise we can't account for this world....
>> So,there exist two things agnana and jgnana (brahman)......atleast at past
>> and present ,maybe at features only jgnana continues to exit....
>>
>> Then how do you prove there exists only jgnana (Brahman),in all three
>> kalas
>> and agnana doesn't exist in all three folds of time?
>>
>> Ramachandra
>>
>> On 11 Aug 2016 11:09 p.m., "V Subrahmanian" <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Ramachandra Achar <
>> > ramachandraachar2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Subbu sir,
>> >>
>> >>                You gave "gumma," example and said,when you come out of
>> >> that notion....gumma is mithya
>> >>
>> >> Here comming out of notion means notion is present at this time right?
>> >>
>> >> And also at the beginning there was only brahman or paramarthika not
>> even
>> >> a pinch of agnana
>> >>
>> >> From there how vyvaharika jgnana or agnana came?
>> >> Without existance can some notion of agnana come?
>> >>
>> > Prakṛti/ajnāna/māyā is anādi. samsāra is anādi. But it can come to an
>> end.
>> > It need not be real. The apparent existence of ajnāna is admitted only
>> to
>> > account for the samsāra. When the non-dual knowledge is appreciated
>> there
>> > can be no place for ajnāna.
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>