[Advaita-l] (no subject)

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Praveen Ji,

In some contexts, when it is declared mAyA/avidya or jIva for that matter
is the cause of srishti, (cannot give references readily for this), , does
it not mean the same way?

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>

On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:13 PM, Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 7:08 PM, H S Chandramouli <
> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Any upAdhi is active due to its association with Chaitanyam alone and
>> Chaitanyam gets the name of the upAdhi itself in that context. Thus
>> Chaitanyam itself is termed shrotraM, manaH etc.
>>
>
> ​
> ​True Chandramouliji, but
> ​we wouldn't like to say Chaitanya itself is termed Maya and avidyA.​
> ​ That itself should settle not using the similar "तस्य तत्/ तस्याः सा"
> kind of phrases w.r.t. Maya/ avidyA.
>
> Kind rgds,
> --Praveen R. Bhat
> /* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
> That owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
>
>