[Advaita-l] Fwd: Re: What is the difference between Maya and avidhya ?

[Ravi Kiran]

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Sujal Upadhyay <sujal.u at gmail.com> wrote:

> ... and to answer the question why one forgets, its explained by examples
> like veiling of Sun by clouds as given in atmabodha. Forgetfulness of own
> nature as atmasvarUpa is mentioned in Ch. Up 'You are that (Brahman)
> Svetaketu' and is repeated nine times. This fact is also mentioned in
> sadAnanda's vedAnta sAra
>
> Throughout the entire process of neti-neti i.e. negation of non-self by
> way of detachment, the first person i.e. 'I' never ever changes or vanishes
> even for a moment. It is the same 'I' that is been sought at. After
> negating everything else other than 'I', one experiences oneself as pure
> consciousness. Now this 'I' is known as Brahman. Wise also says that since
> there was never a time when Brahman or Atman never existed, it was always
> in it's true form, only the veiling of ignorance and wrapping of
> panchamahAbhUta-s created a false ego which claims everything as it's own.
> Definition of truth and unreal is given in BG 2.16.
>
> Also note that you cannot negate your own self. Hence 'I' stays, no
> matters what happens. Anything that is perceived or experienced is because
> of consciousness. This pure consciousness is the real 'I' - the first
> person - always present.
>

Absolutely - kUtastha nitya paramArtha vastu or nitya-suddha-buddha-mukta
svarUpa

>
> Hari OM
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Sujal Upadhyay <sujal.u at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> praNAm-s
>>
>> In panchadashI, SrI vidyAraNya svAmI has said that - after the removal of
>> aGYAna, GYAnI (jIvanmukta) sees mithyA jagat, as mithyA and GYAna are nor
>> opposite. However, GYAnI knows that samsAra is mithyA and hence do not get
>> involved in it.
>>
>> It is like seeing sky meeting land. We know that it is an illusion, yet
>> we keep seeing it :)
>>
>> In case of nirvikalpa samAdhi, one does not see (experience) any brAnti
>> or mithyA jagat, as one is above mAyA, but when one's consciousness
>> descends back to the plane of jagat, it comes under the influence of mAyA.
>> Since mind is necessary to see or experience anything, and mind is under
>> influence of mAyA, it sees or experiences jagat. However, a GYAnI is
>> detached from mind and hence knows the truth.
>>
>> Hari OM
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Ravi Kiran via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>
>>> > Had it really existed, then, like Brahman, it should be existing for
>>> ever.
>>>
>>> True..In that case, jnAna cannot dispel avidya if it really existed (as
>>> it
>>> is not kartru tantra)..
>>> jnAna can only illumine it ..
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 1:02 PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Ramachandra Achar via Advaita-l <
>>> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> > > Yes, subbu sir ,
>>> > >            I accept because of agnana whatever we see is false,and
>>> that
>>> > > object doesn't exist in all three "kaalas",
>>> > > For example snake seen on rope,person seen on dream......
>>> > >
>>> > > I too accept Maya ,which is due to agnana is false and doesn't exist
>>> in
>>> > > three  folds of time.
>>> > >
>>> > > But we have accept the existence of agnana in past and present.
>>> > > For example in dream whatever we see maybe false and doesn't
>>> exist.....
>>> > > But we have to accept the existence of dream in past and present...
>>> > > Similarly, agnana of seeing snake in rope  maybe false....
>>> > > But that agnana,which makes me to see snake in rope is not
>>> false...it is
>>> > > true and 100% exists...otherwise we can't account for this world....
>>> > > So,there exist two things agnana and jgnana (brahman)......atleast at
>>> > past
>>> > > and present ,maybe at features only jgnana continues to exit....
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > The BG 2.16 says about 'Existence': na abhāvo vidyate sataḥ [Existence
>>> will
>>> > never go out of existence.] That which exists can never go out of
>>> > existence. If X is admitted to no longer exist, then its former
>>> existence
>>> > is in question. If māyā/ajñāna/avidyā were admitted to exist at any
>>> time in
>>> > the past and present but not in future, then its earlier existence is
>>> in
>>> > question. Why? For the reason that it does not satisfy the above
>>> definition
>>> > of existence.  Since it is known to cease to exist upon the dawn of
>>> > knowledge, it is deemed to be non-existent in all three periods of
>>> time. It
>>> > only appeared to exist but did not really exist. Had it really existed,
>>> > then, like Brahman, it should be existing for ever.
>>> >
>>> > vs
>>> >
>>> > Then how do you prove there exists only jgnana (Brahman),in all three
>>> kalas
>>> >
>>> > > and agnana doesn't exist in all three folds of time?
>>> > >
>>> > > Ramachandra
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > 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
>>> >
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>