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

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Sri Srinath,
I can see where you are going with this :) this very question was
considered quite extensively in a discussion in early 2014, one in which
you participated (significantly), too.

Don't worry, I'm not stalking you, I was going through the archives to
understand where you were coming from.

Anyway your question
<<how does one suppose to understand truthness of a pramANa when such
pramANa itself is operating "as long as" one does not correctly understand
aikya>> is invalid.

A pramANA doesn't need the support of any other pramANA to establish its
pramANatvam. Especially an upajIvya pramANA like shruti.

One doesn't need anything to understand truthness of shruti pramANA -  One
either accepts shruti or not.

So when shruti says "yatra vedA avedAh", one accepts it - if one believes
in shruti.

Of course if one is shruti viruddha, one can choose to believe whatever
takes their fancy.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan
On 21 Mar 2016 6:47 p.m., "Srinath Vedagarbha" <svedagarbha at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> > And now the question is for the jnAni the bAdha of jagat nAma rUpa would
>> > bring the total disappearance of this jagat??  If the answer is no, and
>> > he would continue to see the jagat, then what is the svarUpa of this
>> > continued perception of jagat??
>> >
>>
>> > The pUrva pakshi had a similar question in the bhAshya of the same
>> sUtra.
>> He asked: नन्वेकत्वैकान्ताभ्युपगमे नानात्वाभावात्प्रत्यक्षादीनि लौकिकानि
>> प्रमाणानि व्याहन्येरन्, निर्विषयत्वात्, स्थाण्वादिष्विव पुरुषादिज्ञानानि
>> - To
>> translate: "if the unity (of Brahman and Atma) is accepted, then the usual
>> pramANAs such as pratyaksha etc become invalid because the absence of
>> manifoldness would deprive them (the pramANas) of their objects; for
>> example, the notion of a man imagined where a post is standing becomes
>> invalid after the post is correctly perceived".
>>
>> To this objection, AchArya replies: यावद्धि न
>> सत्यात्मैकत्वप्रतिपत्तिस्तावत्प्रमाणप्रमेयफललक्षणेषु
>> विकारेष्वनृतत्वबुद्धिर्न कस्यचिदुत्पद्यते
>> - that is, " for as long as a person has not understood the true knowledge
>> of the unity of the Atma with Brahman, until then world of effects which
>> comprise pramAna, prameya, results of actions, etc is not considered
>> untrue."
>>
>
>>
> I have a question here ---
>
>  "not considered as untrue" means considered as true?
>
> If so, how does one suppose to understand truthness of a pramANa when such
> pramANa itself is operating "as long as" one does not correctly understand
> aikya? Since truthness of pramANa is nested with in outer untruthness of
> vyvahAra, it is equivalent to saying pramANa-s are not true after all?
>
> /sv
>
>