[Advaita-l] [advaitin] 'The Jiva is Mithya' - an article in English

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Chandramouli ji.

> Assuming that  my use of the word **locus** is incorrect, it does not
affect my understanding that in mirror illustration, as per VPS, there is
**bheda** (may be apparent) between object and image. Such is not the case
in jIva Brahma Aikya where the word ** प्रतिबिम्बो बिम्बाभिन्नः **
(pratibimbo bimbAbhinnaH) is used in Advaita Siddhi. That is my
understanding.

There is no denying the fact that there is a perception of difference
between bimba-as-bimba (BAB) and bimba-as-pratibimba (BAP). If BAB is
east-faced, BAP is west-faced. So, there is a perception of difference.
However, this difference is upAdhi-krita and not the swarUpa of BAP. The
swarUpa of BAP and BAB is the same.

SwarUpa being same means what? It means their location, material, substance
are all same. Like yellow conch and white conch have same swarUpa. White
conch appears as yellow conch on account of jaundice as the upAdhi.

That is why Advaita Siddhi uses two words - आपातत: भेदप्रतीति and
सयुक्तिकप्रत्यक्ष.

आपातत: refers to pratyaksha without using logic whereas सयुक्तिकप्रत्यक्ष
refers to pratyaksha along with logic.

So, आपातत:, it appears that BAP is some different vastu, whereas
सयुक्तिकप्रत्यक्ष explains that BAP is identical with BAB.

सयुक्तिकप्रत्यक्ष explains that the location, material of BAP and BAB are
same.

VPS statement is in perfect harmony with VivaraNa and Advaita Siddhi.
Vibhajyate does not mean that there arises two entities namely bimba and
pratibimba. Rather, the same mukha-mAtra is transacted as bimba and
pratibimba on account of upAdhi mirror.

So, apparent bheda is not dismissed. Rather it is explained to be
upAdhi-krita.

Further, प्रतिबिम्बो बिम्बाभिन्नः is not restricted exclusively to
Brahma-jIva-aikya. It is applicable to bimba-pratibimba in general. That is
clear from AdvaitaSiddhi. The anumAna is as under -

प्रतिबिम्बो बिम्बाभिन्नः तद्गतसाधारणधर्मवत्त्वात् ,
तद्विरुद्धधर्मानधिकरणत्वात् , बिम्बाजनकाजन्यत्वाच्च । न च
द्वितीयहेतोरसिद्धिः; प्रत्यङ्मुखत्वादिविरुद्धधर्मस्य उपाधिकृतत्वेन
स्वाभाविकविरुद्धधर्मानधिकरणत्वस्य सत्त्वात् । न च बिम्बानन्तरजाते
प्रतिबिम्बे तृतीयहेतोरसिद्धिः; ऐक्यवादिनं प्रति बिम्बानन्तरत्वस्यैवासिद्धेः
।

There are three hetu given here:

1.  तद्गतसाधारणधर्मवत्त्वम् ,
2. तद्विरुद्धधर्मानधिकरणत्वम्
3. बिम्बाजनकाजन्यत्वम्

In response to the charge of hetu-asiddhi for second hetu, AchArya explains
that pratyak-mukha-tva etc are upAdhi-krita. This explains that the
discussion is about usual face-mirror and not exclusively to Brahma-jIva.
Obviously, there is no pratyak-mukhatva in case of Brahman-jIva.

Further, the very fact that it is an anumAna, it means, that it is a
generic thing and not restricted exclusively to Brahma-jIva-aikya.

Thus, VivaraNa, Advaita Siddhi, VPS are all unanimous in aikya of bimba and
pratibimba in general.

Regards,
Sudhanshu Shekhar.