[Advaita-l] ***UNCHECKED*** Extremely powerful reasoning for 'Aham Brahmasmi' in the Bh.Gita

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Sudhanshu Ji.

Definitely yes. chidAbhAsa is mithyA. Everything other than Brahman is
mithyA only.

Regards

On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 6:13 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar <sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Chandramouli ji.
>
> One important point:
>
> Whether the chidAbhAsa is mithyA?
>
> Regards.
>
> On Sat, 21 Oct, 2023, 5:07 pm H S Chandramouli, <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Namase Sudhanshu Ji,
>>
>> In my understanding, Chaitanya AbhAsa is not jada (inert). It is as much
>> sentient as pratibimba. While Pratibimba is like a red rose in a mirror,
>> AbhAsa is like the redness in a crystal. The complete rose is not
>> reflected, but certain attributes of the same, namely redness in this
>> illustration, appears in the crystal. Same is the case with the two
>> different versions in respect of Chaitanya. That does not make AbhAsa any
>> less sentient than pratibimba. Both the versions claim sentiency for their
>> respective versions. Both are associated with the * I * sense and are
>> understood as the प्रमातृ (pramAtRRi), the jIva element in all
>> वृत्तिज्ञान (vRRittij~nAna), knowledge gained through the sense organs.
>> This is also mistakenly understood as  Kshetrajna in the state of ignorance.
>>
>> It is this pratibimba or AbhAsa which illumine all objects in
>> वृत्तिज्ञान (vRRittij~nAna), knowledge gained through the sense organs.
>> So how can the Chaitanya AbhAsa be understood aa jada (inert) ?.
>>
>> Reg  what you have mentioned // The chit-AbhAsa in ahamkAra does reveal
>> objects but is itself revealed by
>> sAkshI. That is to say, sAbhAsa-ahankAra is revealed by
>> avidyA-upahita-chaitanya which is sAkshI. The revealing by jIva is known
>> as
>> vyavasAya whereas revealing of (jnAta, jneya and jnAna) all three together
>> is anuvyavasAya. So, jIva is also known/revealed by sAkshI //
>>
>> my understanding is different.
>>
>> Objects are revealed or illumined by the pratibimba or AbhAsa as the case
>> may be in all वृत्तिज्ञान (vRRittij~nAna), knowledge gained through the
>> sense organs. This knowledge is of the nature // I know the pot //. The
>> object *pot* is revealed or illumined by * I * , the pratibimba or AbhAsa
>> as the case may be. This is the vyavasAya you have mentioned. But objective
>> knowledge is not complete with this. It just ends with the वृत्ति
>> (vRRitti). It is momentary. This knowledge is  immediately replaced by the
>> next वृत्तिज्ञान (vRRittij~nAna). The first वृत्तिज्ञान (vRRittij~nAna)
>> must be registered in the mind. This वृत्तिज्ञान (vRRittij~nAna) itself
>> is revealed or illumined by the sAkshi which has for its object jnAta,
>> jneya and jnAna all three together. This is the anuvyavasAya mentioned by
>> you. वृत्तिज्ञान (vRRittij~nAna) has for its object the vastu, but
>> sAkshi j~nAna has for its object वृत्तिज्ञान (vRRittij~nAna) itself.
>> That is what is registered in the mind for further processing. Ultimately
>> all knowledge is as revealed by the sAkshi only. But in our understanding,
>> we mistakenly understand the knowledge to have been revealed by the
>> प्रमातृ (pramAtRRi), the jIva.
>>
>> I believe with this correction, the rest of the issues stand resolved.
>>
>> This is my understanding.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 2:04 PM Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Namaste V Subramanian ji,
>>>
>>> //That the jiva is mithya is agreed. But what is mithya there is the
>>> anAtmA, kshetra, aspect. The Chit aspect is Brahman. To say that the
>>> kshetrajna is jneya will be conflicting with the 13th chapter, that is my
>>> concern. That chapter is there to discriminate the Kshetrajna, Pure
>>> consciousness, exemplified by the Ravi analogy in the 33 rd verse. So, it
>>> is kevala prakasha svarupa, of the first sentence of the Adhyasa bhashya.
>>> The kshetram stands opposed to it and is the 'tamas' of the Adhyasa
>>> bhashya. The last verse of the 13th chapter has this message: One has to
>>> discriminate oneself from the kshetram (the body mind complex that one
>>> had
>>> taken to be oneself) and identify oneself as kshetrajna and also know the
>>> kshetram to be mithya, abhAvagamana, as the bhashya says. In this scheme
>>> the kshetrajna can't be mithya since he is not jneya. Rather he is the
>>> prakAsha(ka). This is my understanding.//
>>>
>>> I am in full agreement with each word of yours if pratibimba-vAda is the
>>> model.
>>>
>>> In the scheme of AbhAsa-vAda only, I had raised my view.
>>>
>>> Do you think that jIva, in its entirety, is not mithyA even in
>>> AbhAsa-vAda?
>>>
>>> Regards.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>>> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>>
>>> For assistance, contact:
>>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>>
>>