[Advaita-l] No Parinama in Brahman says Shankara Bhagavatpada

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Pls read the last line as: that is why jnAnI's experience is *not* that he
is now free, but that he was always free, never bound.



On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Venkatji
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 11:21 AM Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>> Sudhanshuji will have a problem with this too since the question in his
>>> mind, as I see, is that who is that someone who sees the snake? In the
>>> exemplified it has to be brahman as nothing else exists and then he will
>>> question as to this imagination is also a change!
>>
>>
>> Isn't the pramAta also an aupAdhika entity and mithyA?
>>
> The way I see it is that the entity is not aupAdhika as the only entity
> there is is brahman; its pramAtRtva is mithyA. This is superimposed from
> the kAryaprapancha which doesn't exist from pAramArthika. It is not only
> not a pramAtR, but not even a sAkShi, as there is no sAkShya.
>
>> So nothing other than Brahman really exists, and that which really exists
>> does not undergo change?
>>
> Undoubtedly so.
>
>> The problem of change is only possible in vyavahAra. When there is no
>> vyavahAra in paramArtha what is the need to explain change there?
>>
> I am not explaining change, but I am showing the difficulty of the
> pUrvapakShI. If it is said to be an imagination, he will ask whose
> imagination? If you say of the imagined pramAtA in vyavahAra, he will ask
> who imagined the pramAtA and the vyavahAra. It is endless questioning.
> Therefore, from paramArtha, everything else is not mithyA, there is nothing
> else; its tucCha, which alone is a resolution. Then some will ask as to how
> is vyavahAra possible then? Its not. That is why a jnAnI's experience is
> that he is now free but he was always free, never bound.
>
> gurupAdukAbhyAm
> --praveen
>