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

[Venkatraghavan S]

The second paragraph should read Brahman's asamsargatvam / asangatvam flows
from the *negation* of kArya/kAraNa, AdhAra/Adheya and antaryAmi sambandhAs
between Brahman and jagat. The word negation was missing in the original
email.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan
On 19 Mar 2016 1:11 p.m., "Venkatraghavan S" <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:

> Namaste all,
>
> Another thing that struck me as I was contemplating Sri Bhaskarji's
> question on ब्रह्म सत्यं जगन्मिथ्या जीवो ब्रह्मैव नापरः ardha sloka, is
> that Brahman's kAraNatvam of the jagat is also just an adhyAropa, it is not
> true paramArthata: .
>
> Brahman's asamsargatvam / asangatvam - whether through a kAraNa kArya
> sambandha (Brahma kAraNam, jagat kAryam), or AdhAra Adheya sambandha
> (Brahman AdhAram, jagat Adheyam), or antaryAmi relationship (Brahman as the
> antaryAmi for every object in jagat)  - all flow from jagat's mithyAtvam.
>
> AchArya's bhAshyam for the famous मत्स्थानि सर्व भूतानि and न च मत्स्थानि
> भूतानि pair of adhyAropa-apavAda slokas in the Gita (BG 9.03 and 9.04) is
> very helpful in reflecting on some of these aspects.
>
> Therefore, jagat mithyAtvam is very much a fundamental (and valuable)
> component of  advaita siddhAnta.
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
> On 14 Mar 2016 12:28 p.m., "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.
>>
>> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>> bhaskar
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>