[Advaita-l] (no subject)

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Praveen Ji,



Reg  << unless your statement is "shakti is synonymous with brahman itself">>,




No, I am definitely not saying that.



Reg  << Similarly,Maya can neither be separated from brahman, nor can it
exist apart from brahman, but brahman is not Maya.>>,



In my understanding, << Similarly,>> is not correct. Rest of it is correct.
In respect of तेजसः उष्णवत्, both tejas and ushna enjoy the same level of
Reality. Not so with Brahman and mAyA. They enjoy different levels of
Reality. Hence similarity between the two statements does not exist.



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 Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Chandramouliji,
>
> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 1:25 PM, H S Chandramouli <
> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Reg  << In the strict analysis, I cannot see brahman being अधिष्ठान as
>> the same as meaning माया as अध्यस्त, else it will amount to say that the
>> holder of शक्ति is the cause for that शक्ति।>>,
>>
>>
>>
>> My understanding is that the term for mAyA as shakti in sidhanta is not
>> in the sense of power (to be wielded by another person shakta), but is
>> synonymous with mAyA itself. In other words the term shakti is used in the
>> sense of a  vastu, just like mAyA/avidya is.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> And I'm not saying anything different than "shakti is synonymous with
> mAyA", unless your statement is "shakti is synonymous with brahman
> itself".​ If you are indeed saying the latter, that is also true, yet only
> in the sense of तेजसः उष्णवत्, the heat/ burning power of fire is
> non-different from fire, that is it can neither be separated from fire nor
> can exist without fire, but fire is not heat. Similarly, Maya can neither
> be separated from brahman, nor can it exist apart from brahman, but brahman
> is not Maya.
>
> 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] */
> ​
>
>
>