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

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste Chandramouliji,

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 7:19 PM, H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> << If the labelling of it in a particular way is so important in the
> context of this discussion, so be it prabhuji as you wish >>.
>
> Unquote
>
> It is not a question of nomenclature or labelling. It is Sidhanta.
> According to Advaita Sishanta
>
>
> << Brahman is abhinna nimitta ( vivarta)  upadAna kAraNa for kArya jagat>>.
>
>
> Since jagat is vivarta in Brahman, it is mithya, by definition.
>

Precisely so. It is too simplistic to say that everything is brahman, since
when it is misunderstood it leads to the erroneous conclusion that even
mithyA jagat is brahman, which is nAmarUpAtmaka! To add to that, its not a
mere nomenclature, its a well-thought prakriyA to explain the
unexplainable. In the adhyAropa-apavAda method, if one just holds onto the
adhyAropita kAraNa status to brahman as jagat-kAraNam, apavAda has no role
to play at all. However, Shruti says that brahman is vivartopAdAnakAraNa of
jagat to lead one to the apavAda that jagat is really not there, brahman
alone is there by bAdhasamAnAdhikaraNam. By using verbose explanations of
one's own understanding, at the cost of well-established and well-defined
traditional technical terms, such as mithyA, types of upAdAnakAraNas,
various samAnAdhikaraNams and mixing them all up is very unfortunate indeed.

I am much thankful for the TIkAkAras that followed Bhashyakara, my teachers
and others who use their works to make Shruti statements and bhAShya as
clear as possible.

Kind rgds,
--Praveen R. Bhat
/* Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known!
[Br.Up. 4.5.15] */