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

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Sri Srinath,

<<This is acceptable only if said mithyAthvam is due any other reason other
than avidya (of a ajnAni).>>

Please explain what your understanding of avidyA is, so that I can
understand what you mean by the above comment.

<<So, the question is still valid in terms of how can the validity of
pramANa be supported when itself is under the spell of avidya.>>

Same as above. If the concept of avidyA is correctly understood, this
question will not arise. Anyway this discussion is moot because shruti
states "yatra vedA avedAh", so there is no room for discussion as far as we
are concerned. If you choose to interpret that shruti vAkya differently,
that is your prerogative, but please don't ask me to justify our position
based on your interpretation.


Regards,

Venkatraghavan


On 22 Mar 2016 5:34 p.m., "Srinath Vedagarbha" <svedagarbha at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> Sri. Venkatragghavan,
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Sri Srinath,
>>
>> Actually we are veering from topic, so if you would like to continue this
>> discussion please can you create a separate thread.
>>
>> Your exact question was:
>> <<Since truthness of pramANa is nested with in outer untruthness of
>> vyvahAra, it is equivalent to saying pramANa-s are not true after all?>>
>>
>
> We can definitely discuss in a different thread, but just a point in this
> regard.
>
>
>
>> We need to clarify what is meant by the terms true and untrue in your
>> question. One refers to validity and the other refers to existence. The
>> validity of vedA is self evident as it is a pramANA. The untruth you refer
>> to in your question refers to mithyAtvam (anirvachanIyatvam, sadasat
>> vilakshaNatvam) and not apramANatvam (invalidity as a pramANA).
>>
>> So to answer the question you posted - no it is not equivalent to say
>> that.
>>
>  This is acceptable only if said mithyAthvam is due any other reason other
> than avidya (of a ajnAni). But you see in the siddhAnta it is said it is
> indeed due to avidyA only. So, the question is still valid in terms of how
> can the validity of pramANa be supported when itself is under the spell of
> avidya. It is misleading to think they are different in terms of former
> being epistemological truth while later being ontological mithyathvam.
>
> Your real question should be different - do vedAs exist in pAramArtham?
>> Shruti herself answers that question.
>>
>>
>> That is the matter of interpretation.
>
> /sv
>
>
>
>
>
>