[Advaita-l] Brahma satyam jagan mithya - in Gaudapada Kārikā

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Sri Subrahmanian Ji,



Reg  << Actually we are no differing here. >>,



Definitely not. We are differing if you hold on to the view that kArya is
mithya. I am saying kArya is sathya and nondifferent from kArana, kArya is
as much of a sathya  as kArana is.



Reg  << The vācārambhaṇa śruti taken by itself and without taking into
account other shruti vAkyAs leads to brahmaparinama vAda advocated by Sri
Bhartruprapancha (prior to Sri Bhagavatpada) and later by Sri Bhaskara, Sri
Yadavaprakasha etc who are also considered to be advaitins. The
corresponding statement in respect of Brahman/Creation would then be



वाचारम्भणं विकारो नामधेयं ब्रह्म इत्येव सत्यम्



(vAchArambhaNaM vikAro nAmadheyaM brahma ityeva satyam).



This has been refuted by Sri Bhagavatpada.



Where? >>,



 “Where “ is your question . The rest above is my earlier observation. As
an example please refer BUB on 5-1-1 starting  with अत्रैके वर्णयन्ति —
पूर्णात् कारणात् पूर्णं कार्यम् उद्रिच्यते (atraike varNayanti — pUrNAt
kAraNAt pUrNaM kAryam udrichyate), and upto  << प्रशस्तत्वाच्च शास्त्रार्थो
भवितुमर्हति ।( prashastatvAchcha shAstrArtho bhavitumarhati | ). Sri SSS in
his translation into kannada classifies this part of the Bhashya as
rebuttal of the brahmaparinamavAda of Bhartruprapancha.





Reg  << So, even in vyavahāra, a distinction is made by the vastu
tattvadarśī: the kāryam , vikāra, is avastu, and the paramārtha dṛṣṭi is to
hold that '(as) clay alone' is real >>,





kAryam only when considered  independent of kArana( bereft of upAdAna
kArana ) ​

is avastu. Why put “as” within bracket. kArya is real as kArana alone.
Where is the question of vivarta here? You have also not clarified on the
ontological status of kArya vis-à-vis kArana as per your explanation.



 Regards