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

[Ravi Kiran]

2016-03-23 2:34 GMT+05:30 Srinath Vedagarbha <svedagarbha at gmail.com>:

>
>
> 2016-03-22 13:42 GMT-04:00 V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>:
>
>> In all our discussions on whether or not the world is ultimately Brahman,
>> we should not forget this declaration of Sri Gaudapadacharya:
>>
>> प्रपञ्चो यदि विद्येत निवर्तेत न संशयः ।
>> मायामात्रमिदं द्वैतमद्वैतं परमार्थतः ॥ १७ ॥ 1.17
>> 17 If the phenomenal universe were real, then certainly it would
>> disappear.
>> The universe of duality which is cognized is mere illusion (maya);
>> Non—duality alone is the Supreme Reality.
>>
>> Bhashya:
>>
>> प्रपञ्चनिवृत्त्या चेत्प्रतिबुध्यते, अनिवृत्ते प्रपञ्चे कथमद्वैतमिति,
>> उच्यते
>> । सत्यमेवं स्यात्प्रपञ्चो यदि विद्येत ; रज्ज्वां सर्प इव कल्पितत्वान्न तु
>> स
>> विद्यते । विद्यमानश्चेत् निवर्तेत, न संशयः । न हि रज्ज्वां
>> भ्रान्तिबुद्ध्या
>> कल्पितः सर्पो विद्यमानः सन्विवेकतो निवृत्तः ; न च माया मायाविना प्रयुक्ता
>> तद्दर्शिनां चक्षुर्बन्धापगमे विद्यमाना सती निवृत्ता ; तथेदं प्रपञ्चाख्यं
>> मायामात्रं द्वैतम् ; रज्जुवन्मायाविवच्च अद्वैतं परमार्थतः ; तस्मान्न
>> कश्चित्प्रपञ्चः प्रवृत्तो निवृत्तो वास्तीत्यभिप्रायः ॥
>> The gist is: To say that 'by negating the world, the Advaitic Brahman is
>> known' is also a teaching aid; really speaking there is no world at all to
>> be negated. It is not that the world exists, which is negated. The world
>> does not exist at all in the first place for it to be negated.
>> This is what is stated as:
>> न निरोधो न चोत्पत्तिर्न बद्धो न च साधकः ।
>> न मुमुक्षुर्न वै मुक्त इत्येषा परमार्थता ॥ ३२ ॥ 2.32
>>
>
>>
> Isn't the second definition of mithyA contradicts above position?
>
> Mithya is defined as pratipanna-upAdhau-traikAlika-niShedha-pratiyogitvaM
>
> (Mithya is that which never existed in the locus it is perceived)
>
> So, what is being negated is existence world at the locus where it
> appears, i.e Brahman as adhisTAna.
>

Can existence world be negated ? Is it possible for any vastu which is
really existing to be negated ?

Only that which is not existing in reality, but appears to have an
existence (like rajju-sarpa example), can be negated ...



>
> /sv
>