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

[Ravi Kiran]

> Had it really existed, then, like Brahman, it should be existing for ever.

True..In that case, jnAna cannot dispel avidya if it really existed (as it
is not kartru tantra)..
jnAna can only illumine it ..

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 1:02 PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Ramachandra Achar via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > 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...
> > 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...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....
> >
>
> The BG 2.16 says about 'Existence': na abhāvo vidyate sataḥ [Existence will
> never go out of existence.] That which exists can never go out of
> existence. If X is admitted to no longer exist, then its former existence
> is in question. If māyā/ajñāna/avidyā were admitted to exist at any time in
> the past and present but not in future, then its earlier existence is in
> question. Why? For the reason that it does not satisfy the above definition
> of existence.  Since it is known to cease to exist upon the dawn of
> knowledge, it is deemed to be non-existent in all three periods of time. It
> only appeared to exist but did not really exist. Had it really existed,
> then, like Brahman, it should be existing for ever.
>
> vs
>
> 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
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>