[Advaita-l] mithyaa / anirvachaniiya and asattva

[Rajaram Venkataramani]

>
> By sAkShi what Shankara is meaning is: He/It is the subject, viShayI, which
> can never become an object/viShaya.
>
RV: Not only as Sakshi but as Brahman or Ishwara or Atman also, He is the
subject only never an object. We can only apprehend some of the gunas of
the Ishwara according to te devotee's bhava, never Ishwara Himself without
attaining the very state of Vishnu. So, Ishwara, the Self of all  who is
God, Vasudeva, the Omniscient, the supreme Teacher, who is all that we see,
hear or touche, Lord Vasudeva also never is an object. His gunas are
objects of our cognition not Him. This differentiation seems to be lost on
modern interpreters.

>
> Since Advaita holds that Brahman is not even the cause of the creation,
> epithets such as sAkShI and ishwara will still
> be within the relative realm alone.
>
RV: Please refer your other post where you concede that Brahman is the
karana of the Universe in the sense of rope being the cause of snake. Not
only Sakshi, but even Ishwara and Sakshi are Vishayi only. We can also say
that even the epithet Brahman is relative to the vyavahara only when we
say "All this is Brahman". It is no different to saying "All this is
Vasudeva" or "Vishnu mayam Jagat" or "Sarvam Sivamayam".