[Advaita-l] Advaiti Response to this report?

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms
Hare Krishna

I think here somany wrong assumptions about advaita as a siddhAnta by 
dvaitins.  Which is anyway, bread & butter for their relentless attack on 
advaita :-))

But they will say there is no example for neither true nor false thing. If 
you say Sukti Rajata is Mithya they will say it is Asat.

>  shankara gives an example of water & foam for the mAyA's 
anirvachaneeyatva.  Foam which is not quite the same as water but yet not 
a different entity either.  Likewise, mAyA too cannot be defined to be 
identical with brahman or quite distinct from brahman.  The analogy 
shukti-rajata is not anyway meant to prove mayA's anirvachaneeyatva. 
However, sadasadanirvachaneeya khyAti is the (that there is some 
anirvachaneeya rajata in shukti) latest development propagated by post 
shankara vyAkhyAnakAra-s. 


Nobody has a doubt is the Sukti Rajata is true or false? Everybody will 
say it is false. The world is not Mithya. It may be called as Temporary 
because it can get destroyed but not Mithya. 

>  nor it is satya...coz. the satya never ever undergoes any change. It is 
trikAla abhAditaM.  When the jnAni realizes the svarUpa behind mithyAnAma 
rUpa he would realize the fact that nAma rUpa in their svarUpa is brahman 
only.  The realization of oneness of  kAraNa-kArya is quite clear in 
shankara's advaita.  See for the explanation and clarification in sUtra 
bhAshya. 

Like this world is getting created protected and destroyed and the
cycle is continuing. Why should we call the world Mithya? The nature
of the world is temporary real. But not Mithya. 

> Yes, jagat in its svarUpa is nothing but brahman..Hence we should not 
see jagat as anAtma since it is in its sadrUpa none other than brhman 
only.  Shruti says those who see jagat as anAtma, they are not eligible 
for mOksha (bruhadAraNyaka). Siddhanta here is simple that there is 
nothing exists apart from brahman.  But how come this vyavahArAteeta 
brahman would become jagadAkAra with multiple names and forms??  it is 
just like a snake that is appeared in a rope due to avidyA. Then is it 
acceptable to say that since there is no snake in the rope, there is no 
existence of jagat in brahman??  Not like that since there is no separate 
existence for snake apart from rope, jagat too, in its own svarUpa nothing 
but brahman.  (shankara clarifies in chAdOgya shruti bhAshya).  And in 
sUtra bhAshya too he elsewhere says that the existence is ONLY ONE..So, 
the effect (kArya as nAma rUpAtmaka jagat) is none other than the cause ( 
the brahman) ekaM cha punaH satvaM, athOpyananyatvaM kAraNAt kAryasya. 

Severe criticism coming from them is Advaita makes the whole world a silly 
mistake. 

>  which is really a silly straw man argument from dvaitins, which they 
have been enjoying since centuries :-)) without realizing the concept of 
mithyatva from advaita perspective.

It never happened. We are imagining this world. A person with 
hallucination talks like this.

>  Kindly ask them to study 2nd sUtra of vedAnta sUtra and shankara 
bhAshya with little bit of open mind.

The Jiva goes through  three states. But a dream object is also real.
There is no object in dreamless sleep. How can it show world is
Mithya?

>  That which exists in one state (waking), looks different in another 
state (dreaming) and absent in yet another state (sushupti) is not 
qualified to be called as paramArtha satya.  Hence the socalled existence 
of jagat in strictly restricted to one particular state. And in that state 
also (where we attribute hard core reality to nAmarUpAtmaka jagat) 
siddhAnta insists that it is nothing but THAT.  If you see the jagat from 
upAdhi drushti then it is paricchinna & there is nAnAtva..but if you see 
the jagat from the svarUpa drushti than it is nothing but THAT...Example 
here is, seeing the pot as pot, jar as jar is vyAharArika/upAdhi/avidyA 
drushti & seeing the pot and jar as nothing but clay is pAramArthika 
Atmaikatva drushti.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar