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

[Durga Prasad Janaswamy]

thank you and regards
-- durga prasad

On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 3:25 PM, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <
lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> *श्रीमल्ललितालालितः*www.lalitaalaalitah.com
>
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Durga Prasad Janaswamy <
> janaswami at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hari Om,
>>
>> Pranams,
>>
>> I have few doubts. Appreciate if they can be clarified:
>>
>> 1
>> "​chaitanyam in it's jIvatva-state can't be identified with brahman."
>> ​i. Can we say
>> chaitanyam in it's jIvatva-state is vachArthA,   sudha brahman is
>> lakSharthA?
>>
>
> ​The basic problem here is that we are not talking about shAbdabodha, so
> there is no need to bring vAchyArtha and laxyArtha.
> You wrote vAchArtha and laxArtha? That's enough to tell that there is some
> problem.
> ​
>
>
>> 2.  "vivarttopAdAna can't be identified with kArya"
>> How can one be termed as upadana without knowing that there is a kArya?
>>
>
> ​Did I say anything like that?
> Here, identification means to know as one. I didn't say that kArya can't
> be known.
> ​
>
>
>> 3
>> "If you want to add brahman to nAma and rUpa, then it must be added as
>> adhiShThAna; not as a svarUpa(part) of jagat.
>> While in the case of jIva, brahman(chaitanya) is part of svarUpa too."
>>
>> i. here are we saying
>> chaitanya is part of svarUpa and adhiShThAna is not.
>>
>
> ​No.
> ​
>
>
>> ii. In other words are we saying, there can be adhiShThAna (sat) without
>> chaitanya?
>> chaitanya without adhiShThAna (sat)?
>>
>
> ​No.
> ​
>
>