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

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> praNAms
> Hare Krishna
>
> The jagat in advaita vedAnta is mithya why??
>
> brahma satya jaganmithya jeevo brahmaiva na paraH famouns saying goes in
> advaita though same order of statement cannot be found anywhere in
> prasthAna traya bhAshya of shankara.  I always wonder when the jeeva has
> been identified as brahman why jagat is barred from this status that too
> when advaita readily accepts that for the jagat,  brahman is the both
> upAdAna and nimitta kAraNa??  Well argument may go like this :  since jeeva
> is chaitanya it is acceptable that jeeva in its svarUpa brahman only
> nothing else because brahman is the akhanda chaitanya whereas jagat is jada
> (inert) anAtma hence jagat is not brahman it is mithya only.  Is this mean
> that there exists a thing that can be called as 'anAtma' in  'jada'
> svarUpa?? How can this jada jagat can exist aloof from brahman to bifurcate
> brahman is Chaitanya and jagat is jada and this jada is not brahman but
> only mithyA??   And contrarily,  we elevate upAdhirahita jeeva as brahman
> since upadhi rahita jeeva is in his svarUpa brahman only ?? whereas we are
> not ready to accept jagat in its svarUpa brahman only  when we see the same
> jagat beyond its nAma rUpa, still we argue that jagat is mithya only.  We
> are not ready to accept that once the extra attributes removed from jeeva
> and jagat   what remains is brahman only is it not??   So the equation is
> (a) upAdhi + brahman = jeeva,
> (b) nAma / rUpa + brahman = jagat
> (c) jeeva - upAdhi = brahman and
> (d) jagat - nAma/rUpa = brahman too since what remains after removing
> adhyArOpita is brahman only nothing else.  Under these circumstances how
> can we elevate one aspect as brahman and another one  as mithyA??  Any
> constructive thoughts on this would be most welcome.
>
>
In my limited understanding, jagat is said to be mithya not because of
above analysis you have quoted. But, the argument goes like this in a
nutshell ;

1. This jagat and the samsAra it causes to us is filled with quite dhukha.

2. In order to get out of this dhukha (however it may be apparent or real
it may) we need a means. Shastra is this means.

3. Shastra-s say this dhukha praihAra is possible only by jnAna.

4. If this jagat is causing dhukha and if jnAna is said to be destroy this
dhukha, then the cause of dhukha this jagat cannot be destroyed if it is
real. Hence jagat is said to be mithya.

This is how mithyattvam of jagat is derived from anumAna only. Shruti has
not employed here to drive this point.

This is the gist when  Shankara says while starting the commentary on
vaitathya prakaraNa says that this prakaraNa is meant to prove the falsity
of world using anumAna: tatra upapattyA.api dvaitasya vaitathyaM
shakyate.avadhArayituM iti dvitIyaM prakaraNamArabhate |

/sv