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

[Ravi Kiran]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 12:07 PM, akhanda <akhanda at vsnl.com> wrote:

> Sorry for jumping in so late in this thread.  The thread has been
> meandering across many, highly interesting areas.  But to come back to the
> original question:
>
> (a) As someone else commented earlier in this trhead, in this verse Shri
> Shankaraacharya is addressing the mumkshu, a jiiva. Hence he does not say
> that jiiva is mithyaa, even though he could, and only says jiiva is
> Brahman. Let us not forget for a moment, though, that there is an aspect of
> the jiiva that is mithyaa. Namely, the body-mind complex.
>
> (b) The jiiva also has the reflection of consciousness in his sukshma
> shariira.  In all of creation, it is the jiiva alone that has both the
> mithyaa aspect (jada, the body mind complex) and the satyam aspect (non
> jada, consciousness). In the inert jagat, there is no sukshma shariira,
> hence no chidaabhaasa, hence no reflection of consciousness. It is jada
> through and through.
>
> (c) As Sureswara puts it very well in his Naiskarmyasiddhi, the ahamkaara
> in the jiiva is both the subject (fire) and the object (fuel). The very
> first manifestation of adhyaasa takes place in the ahamkaara, which is
> found only in jiivas. Shri Shankaraacharya exhorts us to examine
> ourselves and discover that we call 'I' is the consciousness aspect in us,
> not the false 'I mithyaa part in us.
>
> Hence the statement by Shri Shankaraacharya seems to intentionally ignore
> the mithyatva of the jiiva (false 'I') and focusses on the Brahmatva of the
> jiiva (the true 'I'). The same cannot be done for jagat, which is false
> through and through.
>

why not?  why not we negate the jagat ( inert jagat, as you say) to realize
the adhiSTAna Brahman, where the jagat appears?

Thanks

>
> My two cents.
>
> Anil (Gidwani)
>
> On 24-Mar-2016 8:19 AM, "advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org via
> advaita-l-bounces"
> <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.orgviaadvaita-l-bounces>@
> lists.advaita-vedanta.org wrote:
>
> Thus, as per the above verse, which Sri Vidyaranya is only quoting, I
> suppose, those who hold
>
> māyā (the world, that is its effect) to be real are 'laukika-s'.
>
>
>
> By concluding so, the author of above assertion is already under the spell
> of mAya, for he is seeing "difference" and posting real distinction between
> 'laukikAs' and not so laukikAs. This difference is not possible unless
> oneself is laukika himself.
>
> To come out of this problem, I guess, one need not make such distinction;
>
>
> vyavahAre bhaTTanayaH
>
>
>
> or make the distinction but not hold difference is undesirable.
>
>
> this sounds better ..
>
>
>
>
> /sv
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>