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

[H S Chandramouli]

Translation by Swami Jagadananda

Regards

On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 8:13 PM H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste.
>
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 9:50 AM V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> // Namaste All,
>
> I remember reading in the Upadeshasahasri a considerably lengthy
> discussion where the unreality of the pratibimba, reflection, has been
> stated. It would be of help if someone brings that part out here //,
>
> Copying below relevant portion from Upadeshasahasri, metric part, Chapter
> 18, “ Thou Art That”.
>
> मुखादन्यो मुखाभासो यथादर्शाचुकारतः |
>
> आभासार्मुखमप्येवमादक्शननुवतेनात्‌ ॥ ३२ ॥
>
> भर्हृकृयात्मनिर्भासो मुखाभासवदिष्यते |
>
>  मुखवत्स्प्रत आत्मान्योऽवि विक्त तौ तथेव च ॥ ३३ ॥
>
> 32, 33. As it imitates the mirror the reflection of a face is different
> from the face. The face which does not depend on the mirror (for its
> existence) is also different (Note 1) from its reflection. Similarly, the
> reflection of the Self in the ego is also regarded (as different from the
> pure Self) like that of the face which is different from the face. The pure
> Self is considered to be different from Its reflection like the face (which
> is different from its own). In fact, however, the Self and Its reflection
> are free (Note 2) from real  distinction between each other like the face
> and its reflection (Note 3).
>
> Note 1 ;; As a matter of fact it is the real face reflected in a mirror
> and acquiring, as it were, the quality of being in it and possessing its
> properties that is called the reflection. The reflection cannot be real,
>  because it is not always in the mirror; nor can it be called absolutely
> unreal, because it is sometimes seen there. Therefore, the reflection is
> indescribable and the face is different from it.
>
> Note 2 ;; Though there is an apparent distinction there is not a real one
> between the Self and Its reflection nor between the Self and the intellect.
> For as a matter of fact neither the reflection nor the intellect has an
> existence independent of the Self. The conclusion is that Pure
> Consciousness, reflected in Ignorance and the ego etc., its modifications,
> is regarded as the individual experiencing transmigratory existence owing
> to a nondiscrimination between Itself and Its reflection.
>
> Note 3 ;;  Which has an existence dependent on that of the face.
>
> मात्माभासाश्चयाश्चेवं मुखाभासाश्रया यथा |
>
> गम्यन्ते राल्नयुक्तिभ्यामाभासासस्वमेव च ॥ ४३ ॥
>
> 43. The Self, Its reflection and the seat of the reflection, (i.e., the
> intellect) are comparable to the face, its reflection and the mirror. The
> unreality of the reflection is known from the scriptures and reasoning.
>
> Regards
>
>
>>
>>