[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Why only jagat is mithya and jeeva is brahman !!??

[Aurobind Padiyath]

Hari Om!
I would recommend that we should make a sincere attempt to have a samavAya
of various prakriyā in different places of the prasthanatraya.
I'm recalling the final mantra in the Maitreyi-Yajgnavalkya, where the
bhashyam and the varitkam should both be studied. To bring the relevant
parts
1. AjnAna prikalpitham Jagat, 2. Atma vyathikarana nasti kinchit 3. Sarvam
AtmaivAbhut. Tatra kena kam paschyet?
We need to understand that both jnAna and AJnana, as atasmin tadbhudhi, are
jnAnam only and when that jnAna removes the atasmin tadbhudhi, the state of
Atma vyatirekena nasti kinchit will arise and then sarvam AtmaivAbhut.

Hari Om!
Aurobind


On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 11:47 Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l, <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> praNAms Sri Venkatraghavan prabhuji
>
> Hare Krishna
>
> First of all,  thank you very much for typing the original Sanskrit in
> English.  I think and as I have stated earlier prapanchOpashamanaM or
> prapaNcha pravilayaM  in Advaita is very significant prakriya
> (methodology)  in understanding the tureeyAtma who is prapanchOpashamanaM,
> shivaM, shAntaM and advaitam.  But at the same time, I am surprised why the
> reconciliation of this mantra with other shruti AND sUtra bhAshya vAkya-s
> is so difficult when it has been numerous time  said that  kArya is kAraNa
> rUpa whereas there is no kArya in kAraNa, ananyatvepi kArya karaNayOH
> kAryasya kAraNAtmatvaM ‘NA TU KAARANASYA KAARYAATMATVAM’, brahma svabhAvO
> hi prapanchaH, ‘NA PRAPANCHA SVABHAAVAM BRAHMA’.  Anyway with this
> background let me once again try to share my understanding with regard to
> mAndUkya mantra 7.
>
> Brahman’s abhinna nimmittOpadAna kAraNatva, sarvAtma bhAva has been
> described keeping in the mind that mind invariably travels outwards.  When
> the jnAni sees the external world (i.e. kArya prapancha) his realization
> would fetch him the knowledge that it is Atman only nothing else.  jnAni’s
> darshana is NOT mithyA darshana it is satya darshana only because : ya evaM
> veda ahaM brahmAsmeeti sa idaM sarvaM bhavati says bruhadAraNyaka.  But as
> the same time jnAni in his svarUpa neither bahirprajnA nor antaH prajnA nor
> prajnAna Ghana because in his svarUpa he is nirguNa, nirvikAri and
> nirvishesha brahman only.  Again when the jnAni sees outside he knows the
> objects those are existed outside is nothing but kAraNa only in kAryAkAra
> rUpa whereas in his svarUpa he is nirguNa nishprapancha and nirvikAri.
> Kindly recall the gold-ornaments example.  Though ornaments are vikAra of
> gold and for the ornaments there is no separate existence apart from gold
> whereas in gold itself there is no vikAra as such as ornaments, there is no
> kAryAkAra hence there will not be any kAraNatvaM either in gold!! Bhuma is
> that where another is not seen, another is not heard another is not known,
> yatra nAnyat pashyati, nAnyatchruNOti…..sa bhUma, neha nAnAsti kiMchana and
> the below maNdUkya as well to drive home the point in gold there is no
> vikAra and vikAra janita vyavahAra in whatever sense.   From the gold point
> of view these vikAra-s are kevala adhyArOpita whereas for the vikAra-s the
> same ‘gold’ is material and efficient cause.
>
> Now, coming to your particular point, i.e. kArya prapancha abhAva= jagat
> mithyA, does this mean after jnana this jagat is no more ‘indriya
> vedya’!!??  I don’t think ‘abhAva’ of kArya will prove the jagat
> mithyatvaM.  To understand this,  first of all we have to analyse the
> process of prapancha upashamanaM or prapancha pravilayaM!! what exactly is
> the saMbandha (relationship) between the  saMpUrNa vikAra rahita, vishesha
> rahita, niravayava para brahman and sAvayava, savishesha, vikAri jada
> jagat??  What is the purpose of addressing   both brahman and jagat in same
> adhikAraNyaM?? (sAmAnAdhikAraNyaM).  Shankara answers this in sUtra bhAshya
> : sarvaM brahma iti sAmAnAdhikAraNyaM prapanchapravilayanArthaM na
> anekarasatApratipAdanArthaM.  It has been said in the sense the effect is
> of the nature of brahman but brahman is not of the nature of the effect.
> It is only to sublimate the world (ornaments) and not to convey that
> brahman (gold) contains multiplicity.  That is the reason why though the
> clay is upAdAna & minitta of clay, clay as such in its svarUpa ‘arUpameva’
> and that is the ultimate truth of clay and arUpa of clay / gold / brahman
> is pradhAna tattva.  arUpavadeva hi tatpradhAnatvAt says vedAnta sUtra.
>
> Now the question is why at the first place we should admit the world and
> then talk about the upashamanaM or prvilApanaM of it when there is no kArya
> – kAraNa in the ultimate nirivikAri parabrahman??  From the beginning
> itself why don’t we consider that this jagat is mithyA ??  To answer this
> again we have to go back to the same old mrudghata analogy.  Mrut sAmAnya
> is ultimately nirvikAri nirvishesha and in it there is no kArya vishesha or
> mrutvishesha like mrutpinda or mrudghata.  But for the mrutpinda and
> mrudghata mrutsAmAnya is the essence.  If this is not the case if one
> particular jnAni can do the pravilApanaM or upashamanaM of this jagat
> through his vidyA literally, this jagat would have not been available for
> the rest of the jeeva-s.  Hence abhAva here is not ‘absence’ or
> non-existent OTOH kArya jagat would appear to jnAni in kAraNa rUpa and in
> this kAraNa rUpAtmaka (AtmAvruta) jagat the jeeva’s avidyAkalpita jagat
> (i.e. ahamkAra, mamakAra, this is my wife, this is my son this is my house
> etc. ) is abhAva  or sublimated through samyAkjnAna.  So jagat would be
> indriya vedya for both jnAni and ajnAni but drushti kOna will be different,
> former’s is samyak, brahmaikatva sama drushti whereas later’s is
> parichinna, abrahma, asarva avidyA kalpita vrutti.
>
> Therefore in the enthusiasm of retaining the prapanchOpashamanaM tureeya,
> if one dismisses the existence of jagat for which brahman is OtaprOta it is
> wrong.  It is like vainAshika siddhAnta. And if the world is dropped by
> deeming it as an avidyA kalpita illusion and it’s complete abhAva in the
> post jnana period then there is no way at all to arrive at brahman coz.
> Shruti also depends on nAma and rUpa of jagat to convey the nirguNa,
> nirvishesha svarUpa of brahman.  Moreover, this type of prapancha
> pravilApaNam (total elimination of jagat or saMpUrNa abhAva of kArya jagat
> or melting the jagat in jnAnAgni like melting the ghee in fire etc. if at
> all that is meant in the statement : kArya prapancha abhAva = jagat
> mithyA)  is not possible to the jnAni and it is possible only to Ishwara at
> the time of praLaya clarifies shankara in sUtra bhAshya : kOyaM
> prapanchapravilayO nAma?? Kim agnipratApa saMpaktatvAt ghrukATiNya
> pravilaya eva prapanchapravilayaH kartavyaH??  ….sa purusha mAtreNa
> ‘ashakyaH’ pravilApanaituM eti tatpravilayOpadeshOshakya vishaya eva syAt,
> ekenacha Adimuktena pruthivyAdhi pravilayaH krutaH iti idAneeM pruthivyAdhi
> shUnyaM jagat abhavishyat.  Elsewhere insists shankara about the the role
> of jnana : na tu pAramArthikaM vastu kartuM nivartaituM vA arhati brahma
> vidyA.  These unambiguous statements are self-explanatory no need for any
> elaboration.  Jagat is pratyaksha pramANa siddha and praLaya or upashamana
> or antya of it can be happen only at the time of praLaya, jnana or svarUpa
> jnana that it is nirvishesha nirvikAra etc. is shAstra siddha or
> shAstrAdhArita or vedAnta vAkya janita jnAna and both pramANa-s will not
> come in the their way as two different pramANa and their vishaya donot
> contradict each other.
>
> In short, pravilApanaM happens in the form of vyashti (jeeva) realizing
> its samashti rUpa (brahmaikatva bhAva) And this brahmaikatva bhAva
> (sarvAtma bhAva) is nothing short of his (jeeva-s) svarUpa jnana that he is
> in svarUpa sarva vikAra rahita.
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>
> Bhaskar
>
> PS:: disclaimer : I am not claiming that this is what is the ultimate
> siddhAnta as per orthodox t shankara saMpradAya nor I am compelling anyone
> to accept it.  These are all the open thoughts of me based on my
> understanding of shankara vedAnta.  Having said this, as I clarified
> earlier, the above stand is not a ‘new born baby’ in shankara saMpradAya ☺
> stalwarts like Late Prof. SKR Rao (was heading the Kalpataru Research
> Institution at Sringeri Mutt, B.lore branch) And other eminent and devoted
> scholars who are no more good friend of my parama guruji Sri SSS at any
> stretch of imagination ☺ are of the same opinion.  I am just elaborating
> that stand with my (limited) understanding of bhAshya vAkya.  Prabhuji-s
> are welcome to disagree with me.  I don’t have any issues or hard feelings ☺
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>
-- 

Aurobind Padiyath
+91-9689755499