[Advaita-l] Advaita Siddhi series 014 - dvitIya mithyAtva vichAra: (part 6)

[Ravi Kiran]

Thanks Venkatraghavanji

1 clarification below :

On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Ravi Kiran ji,
>
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 4:21 AM, Ravi Kiran <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>> Until now, we have been translation upAdhi as locus, but its
>>> interpretation
>>> goes beyond just that. upAdhi = upa (samIpe) + AdhIyate svadharma: yena.
>>> That which causes the attributes that belong to itself to be perceived as
>>> belonging to a proximate object is upAdhi.
>>>
>>> Brahman is the upAdhi with respect to the world,
>>
>>
>> How to understand this ?  ( normally upAdhi referred as, avidyA (jIva) or
>> mAya (Ishvara) )
>>
>>
> upAdhi has many different interpretations, this is one which is relevant
> to us here. In the second definition of mithyAtva, brahman is the upAdhi
> for the jagat. How? By lending existence to the world, it is essentially
> transferring its nature to the world. upa samIpe AdhIyate svadharma: yena.
>

this would indicate some action ( by lending or transferring ) on part of
nirvikAra Brahman ? is it not ? If viewed from other side ( world), by
borrowing existence (because of mAya/avidyA), it would be more appropriate ?


>
>
>
>> because the sat that is
>>> brahman appears as the sattA of the world.
>>
>>
>> Is it meant that sat - as attribute that belong to itself (svadharma) -
>> Brahman ?
>>
>> which implies - sat being considered as attribute of  (attributeless)
>> Brahman, while sat is Brahman Itself ?
>>
>
> It is to avoid this that I said that sat appears as jagat sattA. I did not
> want people to say Brahman's dharma is sat which is transferred to the
> world, which would make Brahman saguNam. Brahman's svarUpa is lent to the
> world.
>
>
>> It is the word upAdhi, which indicates a real substratum. We hold
>>> that illusion requires a real substratum,
>>
>>
>> upAdhi as real substratum (Brahman)?
>>
>
> Yes, the sat adhikaraNa appears as an attribute of the Aropita vastu.
>
>
>
>> whereas the shUnyavAdin does not
>>> require a real substratum for an illusion.
>>>
>>> शून्यवादिभि: सदधिष्ठानभ्रमानङ्गीकारेण the shUnyavAdins do not acknowledge
>>> that an illusion must have a real substratum
>>>
>>> कवचिदप्युपाधौ सत्त्वेन प्रतीत्यनर्हत्वरूपासद्वैलक्षणस्य (क्वचिदप्युपाधौ
>>> सत्त्वेन प्रतीत्यर्हत्वरूपस्य) शुक्तिरूप्ये प्रपञ्चे चानङ्गीकारात्  |
>>> therefore
>>> they do not acknowledge a difference between asat, which is incapable of
>>> appearing as existing in any upAdhi,
>>
>>
>> Should we take the meaning of upAdhi as locus of appearance?
>>
>> Then, by the earlier definition of upAdhi - samIpe AdhIyate svadharma:
>> yena , how to do samanvaya ?
>>
>> You can take upAdhi as locus of appearance also. The samanvaya would be
> that by "locus of appearance" what is meant is that the locus, the
> adhikaraNa, lends existence to the object, allowing the object to appear as
> existing.
>
> Regards
> Venkatraghavan
>