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

[Ravi Kiran]

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

>
> praNAms Sri Venkatraghavan prabhuji
> hare Krishna
>
> Therefore, bAdha according to AchArya is the negation of the false notion
> that the world has any independent existence.
>
>
> Ø     Beautiful prabhuji.  This is what shankara clearly said in
> chAndOgya.  And the independent existence of kArya jagat is not possible
> and independent existence of jagat is kevala avidyAkalpita from the result
> of which jeeva gets the ahaMkAra, mamakAra (notions that he is kartru,
> bhOktru etc.) whereas in reality kAryAkArOpi kAraNasya AtmabhUta eva,
> anAtmabhUtasya anArabhyatvAt clarifies shankara.  Interestingly shankara
> talking about kAryAkAra i.e. nAma rUpa and clarifying that KAraNasya
> Atmabhutameva not mithyA as popularly understood.
>
> And shAstra as a pramANa for its ‘vishaya’ is not to prove the pratyaksha
> pramANa as wrong.  Shabda / Agama pramANa has a different subject matter
> which cannot be known by any other pramANa.
> Undoubtedly, but that is not the subject matter of the discussion.
>
>
> Ø     I had to bring this point because the subject matter of this thread
> is ‘jagat’ mithyatvaM and jagat and its satyatvaM are the subject matter of
> pratyaksha pramANa.  Since brahma as the kAraNa of this jagat is
> apratyaksha unlike in mrud-ghata (where mrittike in ghata rUpa pratyasha
> pramANita) we have rely on shruti pramANa to know that jagat kAraNatvaM
> which is avyavahArya, nirvishesha in its very nature.  Now the question is
> are we dependent on shruti pramANa to know/realize the sva-svarUpa of ours
> or are we using the shruti pramANa to prove prama of pratyaksha pramANa is
> wrong??


One is at paramArtha and other is vyavahArika ? why compare them ?


> From two different pramANa-s we are knowing the two prama-s.  I.e. through
> pratyaksha pramANa this jagat and through shabda pramANa nirvishesha,
> ateendriya brahman.  Or the other way asking the question is : is the
> one-ness of brahman determined by pratyaksha pramANa or shAstra pramANa??
> It is impossible to realize the one-ness of brahman through pratyaksha
> pramANa because what is pratyaksha is jagat and NOT the nirvishesha
> brahman.


Yes..Hence,  Sruti advocates neti neti teaching, to de-invest the reality
given to jagat (diversity, bhedham) and realize the one-ness of brahman



> So, the one-ness of the brahman (ekatvaM) is not at all the subject matter
> of pratyaksha pramANam. The ekatvaM needs to be known by pramANAntara
> (different pramANa) i.e. shabda that which is again should not go against
> ‘subject matter’ of another pramANa i.e. pratyaksha.


*should not go against* - Why you are enforcing such conditions ? Why there
is a need as such? what we are trying to prove by bringing different
pramANas in the discussion?




> As you know one pramANa will never contradict other pramANa.  And now the
> important question is :  why at all the names and forms of this
> multifarious jagat to be declared as mithya (when it is pratyaksha pramANa
> siddha ) to realize the Agama pramANita ekatvaM of brahman??



Because Sruti says so ..

*vAchArambanam* vikAram nAmadeyam, mrtikka eva satyam


Neti-neti



> edam sarvaM yadayamAtma, bramaivedaM amrutaM purastAt etc. are the
> clear-cut declaration of shruti, can this shruti statements to be swept
> aside just to prove the jagat mithyatva and brahman satyatva??  I donot
> think this is an appropriate approach to the shruti yukti and anubhava to
> realize the nirvishesha brahman.  For that matter even for the Agama it is
> impossible to convey an unknown (apratyaksha) thing without taking the
> shelter under words & objects of the world says shankara somewhere.  If we
> are tenacious to prove the jagat mithyatva then that which has been being
> conveyed by this mithA prapancha by Agama too become mithyA only not satya.
>

IN another thread, you mentioned:

> For me jagat and its nAma rUpa sadrupameva satyaM, if it is perceived
aloof from its adhishtAnaM anrutameva.  Thinking that jagat is
> different from brahman is avidyA drushti which is the root cause of
ahaMkAra, mamakAra whereas jnAni’s drushti is samyak drushti for > him
there exists nothing apart from That.

If that is your viewpoint, it is fine ... That
*Ekam evadvitiyam vastu, you prefer to name it is as Jagat instead of the
more popular Brahman, it is fine, that is your choice, as there cannot be 2
realities - Brahman and Jagat , both having satyatvam in advaita..*



>
> 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
>