[Advaita-l] Fwd: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} couple of questions regarding "bramha satyam jagan-mithya"

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste.

Thanks for the clarification.

The original question we discussed is copied below.

<<  // Therefore, the jagat becomes ajñāna-vilakṣaṇam, that which is
produced
through bhāva-rūpa-ajñāna.//

I request members to comment/clarify/verify the above sentence, especially
the first part there.  Is it 'ajnana vilakshanam' or anything else?  >.

The clarification you have now given is jagat to be Brahma
vilakshanam. Not 'ajnana
vilakshanam'. That is definitely so as per Advaita Sidhanta.That was what I
had pointed out.

Reg   the other part of your discussion with Sri MDS, copied below

<< Regarding the above I had a conversation with Sri Mani Dravid
Sastrigal.  He explained thus:  Ajnana is the kaaraNam and jagat is kaaraNa
vilakshaNam. How? he gave this example: even though clay is the karanam for
pot, yet, we perceive pot as an object with a rotund shape, etc.and not as
clay. Similarly jagat is perceived not as ajnanam but as endowed with so
many objects, giri, nadi, etc. He cited the Mundaka mantra  …यथोर्णनाभिः
सृजते गृह्णते च यथा पृथिव्यामोषधयः सम्भवन्ति । यथा सतः पुरुषात्केशलोमानि
तथाक्षरात्सम्भवतीह विश्वम् ॥ ७ ॥   to drive home the point that 'the karyam
can be kaaraNa vilakshanam too.' And in the Bhashya it is said, this mantra
gives examples for both 'the karyam is of the nature / form that is
non-different from kaaranam and also quite different, vilakshanam, from the
kaaraNam.' >>,

The Bhashya considers both entities as kAraNam for Jagat, namely both
sentient (Chaitanya/Akshara/B*rahman*) and insentient(ajnAna)  (for which
पृथिवी pRthivI is taken as upalakshaNa) entities. With reference to
Chaitanya considered as kAraNa, jagat as kArya is kAraNa vilakshaNa. When
ajnAna is taken as kAraNa, jagat is not kAraNa vilakshaNa but salakshaNa.

<<  यथैते दृष्टान्ताः, तथा विलक्षणं सलक्षणं च निमित्तान्तरानपेक्षाद्य……>>

<<  yathaite dRRiShTAntAH, tathA vilakShaNaM salakShaNaM cha
nimittAntarAnapekShAdya………>>.
This is my understanding.

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 Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 3:13 PM V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 3:07 PM H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 1:57 PM V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> << And regarding the sadasadvilakshanam aspect we discussed, he agreed
>>> that the understanding that all vaadins hold the jagat to be unchanging, vilakshanam
>>> from Brahman and also different from asat vastu >>.
>>>
>>> Namaste.
>>>
>> A quick clarification before I respond to the whole post. In the above,
>> ** vilakshanam from Brahman and also different from asat vastu ** is
>> fine. However is there a typo (error)  in the portion ** he agreed that
>> the understanding that all vaadins hold the jagat to be unchanging  **
>> ??. Please clarify.
>>
>
> Yes, a typo, a horrible one:  I wanted to say  //Brahman to be
> unchanging.//  Thanks for pointing out.
>
> regards
>
>>
>> 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>
>> <#m_4260776288961983978_m_6223070530826812787_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>