[Advaita-l] Who is Ishwara? He is NARAYANA only. Beautiful and soothing Narayana Bhajan

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

Namaste Sri.Praveen.

May be I can help put a clarity on Sri.Kalyan's question.



On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 8:48 PM, Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Kalyanji,
>
> On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Kalyan via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Isn't the nirguNa nirvishesha Atman itself the biggest and only ignoramus
> > in advaita? It beats me how such an Atman, wallowing in ignorance, can be
> > described as param jyoti.
> >
> ​If the Atman is nirguNa nirvishesha, how can he have the attribute of
> ignorance?​
>


That exactly is the question of Sri.Kalyan to AV.  If nirguNa-nirviShESha
brahman is always is, how could AV brings mAya/avidya to explain this
dvandva prapancha? Since ignorance cannot float freely without any aShraya,
and given that only NB is only the tatva according to AV, then his question
is how NB possibly could have ignorance? If it cannot then why invoke
ignorance argument to explain away duality?


>
> So I suggest you explain what you understand by the word mithyA in contrast
> to sat and asat, if you're really interested to get an answer to the
> question you posed.
>
>
If you permit me, let me explain mithya w.r.t to Sat and Asat.  NyAmrita
deals with not single, but by five definitions of 'mithya' as propounded
across various texts in Advaita.  Ignoring all those technical definitions
aside, let me say -- mithya is not at all an  ontological category such as
sat & asat, but rather an epistemological error confusing one for the
other.

/sv