[Advaita-l] is this jagat mithyA ?? Sri SSS

[H S Chandramouli]

>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 11:34 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> << I see a sharp disagreement, a contradiction, between the two
> statements Sri SSS is making in the two paragraphs shown above >>,
>
>
>
> I think it is difficult to see a person of the standing of Sri SSS
> contradicting himself on such an important issue in the same short article.
> We could attempt to understand the same in its proper perspective.
>
>
>
> Reg  << Having said this above, in p.15 top, at the end of the article in
> the same page, he says: Hence, what is the final reply to the question 'Is
> the world mithyā?' The world, in its true form of Paramātman, Brahman, it
> is really satya alone. Seen thus, nothing ever is mithya. The world
> perceived by the ignorant as different from Brhaman is not existent at all.
> Hence there is no room for the question 'is the world real or not?'  You
> call it the world or Brahman, what exists is one non-dual entity. Nothing
> exists other than that. >>,
>
>
>
> I think this should be understood as below.
>
>
>
> The sentence  << The world, in its true form of Paramātman, Brahman, it
> is really satya alone.>> should be understood as  << the kAraNa of jagat
> ( world) alone is satyam >>.  The tAtparya  is that   << what exists is
> one non-dual entity ( ONLY Brahman is satyam ) >>.   From the standpoint
> of the Brahman,  << Nothing exists other than that >>  holds good. This
> also discounts the view that according to Sri SSS, jagat (world ) is satya.
>
>
>
> The term jagat ( world ) in the  sentence  << Is the world mithyā? >>
> should be understood as  << Brahmabhinna jagat >>,  and the answer is  << The
> world perceived by the ignorant as different from Brhaman is not existent
> at all >>.
>
>
>
> Having said that, I also feel Sri SSS has concentrated only on the
> Existence aspect in his conclusion. Though the jagat ( world ) is
> Nonexistent, it is Experienced. That is what makes it Mithya. But he has
> not taken it into consideration in his conclusion.
>
>
>
> Regards
>

<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>