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

[Venkatraghavan S]

True, what is meant that it's mere presence, sannidhi, it confers
existence. No action on the part of Brahman is implied.
Regards,
Venkatraghavan

On 27 Oct 2017 8:03 a.m., "Ravi Kiran" <ravikiranm108 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> 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
>>
>
>