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

[Venkatraghavan S]

Yes. Sri Bhaskar's contention is that jagat is Brahman. I see three ways
for that to hold good:

1) There is no difference between jagat and Brahman. If there is no
difference then jagat is simply nAma rUpa, which is mithyA. This ends up
proving the opposite of Bhaskarji's contention.

2) There is a difference between kArya jagat and kAraNa Brahman. If there
is a difference then how is jagat Brahman? Further, if there is a real
difference, and we somehow say that jagat is Brahman, this implies svagata
bheda in Brahman. This option is not possible as that is shruti viruddha
(neha nAnAsti kinchana) and yukti viruddha (we start off saying jagat is
Brahman and end up proving jagat isn't Brahman).

3) There is a difference in vyavahAra but no difference in paramArtha
between jagat and Brahman. Put like this, the difference between Brahman
and jagat itself is sadasat vilakshaNam. So the next question is, is that
difference mithyA or satyam? To answer that question we have to go through
the same 3 options, and if we reject the first 2 of the options for the
same reasons as above, we have to posit a second difference that is sadasat
vilakshaNa too, and so on so forth, leading to infinite regress. So the
more we try to define jagat, the more it eludes description, leaving us to
conclude that all we can say about jagat is that it is mithyA and leave it
at that.

Not sure if all that makes sense, but that's my understanding of the topic.

Regards
Venkatraghavan
On 30 Mar 2016 3:29 p.m., "Ravi Kiran" <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Namaste
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Bhaskar ji.
>>
>> <<First of all as I have been reiterating the jagat which is Ishwara
>> hetuka, the jagat for which brahman is abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa, the
>> jagat / kArya which is like kAraNa trishu kAleshu na vyabhicharati, that
>> jagat which has been pointed out by shruti as brahma (like sarvaM
>> khalvidam
>> brahman, brahmaivedaM vishwaM etc.)  is not mithyA.>>
>>
>> This jagat that you refer to as not mithyA, is Brahman. What you are
>> merely
>> doing is attributing a name called jagat to this Brahman and saying that
>> the "name" is non different to brahman,
>
>
> Yes, this is exactly what I understood also from all the posts from
> Bhaskar-ji and commented so, in one of the earlier emails ..
>
> If this Atmaikatva jnana (as he says) is extended further to a different
> realm ( as in jnAni's vyavahAra he quotes - whatever he does is
> satyameva, his vyavahAra with this jagat  is satyameva ), I see the
> dilution (avidya kalpita) ...
>
> which is just a tautology -
>> anything in your conception of jagat, other than a mere name, would imply
>> a
>> difference from Brahman, and there can be no svagata bheda in Brahman.
>>
>> <<The jagat which is independent of its kAraNa is mithyA, since this
>> mithyA
>> jagat is in reality not possible to exist it is mithyA only. >>
>>
>> Then your conception of mithyA is just Atyantika asat, not sadasat
>> vilakshaNa mithyA.
>>
>> <<jnana does not bring bhedAkAra nivrutti, it only bring bheda buddhi
>> nivrutti.  brahmavidyA does not create or destroy a thing in front says
>> shankara in bruhadAraNyaka.>>
>> Yes, Bhaskarji. We don't state that the AkAra of jagat is destroyed by
>> jnAna. However, what is bheda buddhi nivrutti actually mean? Since AkAra
>> is
>> the thing that is "perceptible", bheda buddhi nivrutti means  bhedAkAra
>> satyatva nivrutti. And if the satyatva of bhedAkAra is negated, what is
>> left? Only Brahman.
>>
>> <<Not only antaryAma /AdhAra / AdhishtAna he (brahman) is the upAdAna too
>> for this vyAvahArika objects. That we should not forget while throwing the
>> vyAvahArika jagat in mithyA basket.>>
>>
>> This is just a provisional status. Initially we say brahman is the upAdAna
>> for the vyAvahArika objects, but in reality, its upAdAna status is also
>> adhyAropita only, it is mithyA also. In apavAda, even this upAdAnatvam is
>> negated as mithyA. That is why Krishna says "na cha matsthAni bhUtAni".
>>
>> <<If we discount the kArya-kAraNa ananyatvaM, if we negate the Ishwara
>> hetuka srushti, if we deny the pancheekaraNa, trivrukkaraNa just to prove
>> the illusory nature of jagat we have to ignore major portion of sUtra,
>> geeta and shruti and without our knowledge unfortunately we are wearing
>> the
>> attire of vijnAnavAdins when it comes to jagat existence. >>
>>
>> It is simply part of adhyAropa-apavAda prakriyA. We are not vijnAnavAdis,
>> because they say that jagat is a projection of the mind, whereas we say it
>> is a projection of avidyA. By the way, by avidyA, I mean brahmAshrita
>> avidyA.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Venkatraghavan
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>