[Advaita-l] Two Advaitic verses with a profound combined purport

[Sanju Nath]

Dear श्री Venkatraghavanji,

प्रणाम,

Thank you for this very clear and comprehensive explanation of this famous
Advaitic sentence.

Helped me grasp the meaning a lot, cannot say “finally” because there’s
always more to understand from this ocean.

धन्यवाद:
संजीवेन्द्र नाथ

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 8:25 AM kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Venkatraghavanji - PraNAms
> Beautiful analysis. Hats of to you.
> Hari Om!Sadananda----------------------
>
>
>    On Tuesday, March 26, 2019, 4:24:09 PM GMT+5:30, Venkatraghavan S via
> Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>  Namaste Bhaskar ji,
>
> You had asked:
>
> "When both these (jeeva and jagat) have both lakshya and lakshaNa aspects
> and satyatvaM is already attributed to brahman in the very first statement
> (brahma satya) why this partiality in jeeva-jagat analyzation and
> concluding  that only jeeva is satyaM ( brahma = satya, jeeva = brahman
> hence jeeva is satya) and jagat is mithyA??  Why we should not consider
> upalakshya in both jeeva and jagat and declare satya or why we should not
> consider upalakshaNa aspect in both jeeva and jagat and say mithyA??"
>
> There are two reasons. The first is grammatical, and the second is related
> to the process of moksha.
>
> As you know, to arrive at any sentence meaning, we need to understand the
> word meaning first. And in understanding any word, the first word-meaning
> considered is the word's primary meaning, mukhyArtha.
>
> However, when the primary meaning of the words constituting the sentence
> leads to an illogical connotation (anvaya anupapatti),  impeding the rise
> of sentence meaning, or if the intended meaning of the sentence is lost
> (tAtparya anupapatti), one resorts to lakshaNA and takes the lakshyArtha -
> the secondary or implied meaning of the words. The lakshyArtha may only be
> taken if taking the mukhyArtha is problematic.
>
> In the sentence jIvo brahmaiva nApara:, if we take primary meaning of the
> word jIva, the sentence meaning conveying oneness of the jIva with Brahman
> would be rendered logically impossible. Further the tAtparya of the
> sentence to convey abheda of jIva with shuddha chaitanya - which is the
> parama tAtparya of all shruti and the knowledge
> of which is the cause of moksha - would be lost.
>
> Hence by necessity, we discard the primary meaning of the word jIva and
> take the lakshyArtha - which is shuddha chaitanya.
>
> In the case of the sentence jaganmithyA, the jagat, whose mithyAtva is
> intended to be conveyed in the sentence, is the primary meaning of the word
> 'jagat'. There is no anvaya anupapatti and tAtparya anupapatti by taking
> the primary meaning. Thus, there is no need to discard the primary meaning
> of the word jagat and take up the secondary meaning.
>
> Thus we have grammatically valid reasons for taking the jIva to be the same
> as chaitanya, whereas the world is taken in its primary sense - to be the
> world that we interact with daily.
>
> Coming to the second reason. As you know, moksha in advaita is through
> jnAna. Such a jnAna should be capable of removing the cause of samsAra for
> it to be capable of leading to moksha. The cause of samsAra is ignorance of
> the self - not knowing who one is really. That ignorance leads to the
> imagined division of the self into an "I" and "it/they". The "I" is the
> jIva, in the primary sense, and the "it" is the jagat, in the primary
> sense.
>
> For ignorance, the cause of samsAra, to be removed by knowledge, knowledge
> and ignorance must have the same object. The ignorance we are talking about
> has only Brahman as its object - and nothing else. There is nothing else
> other than Brahman to objectify. So, knowledge too must only have Brahman
> as its object. It cannot have any other thing apart from Brahman as its
> object, for it to be capable of removing ignorance. Thus, the knowledge of
> "I" the jIva, where "I"/ the jIva contains any aspect of avidyA within it,
> will be incapable of removing ignorance and conferring moksha. Hence, it is
> said that in the jIva brahma analysis, jIva is stripped of every aspect of
> ignorance. But how to do that?
>
> Merely wishing something away does not mean that it ceases to exist.
> If ignorance
> is real, how can one strip away ignorance from the jIva? The jIva is
> everyday faced with the world which constantly reminds him of his ignorance
> and limitation. So as long as the world is real, it limits the jIva, and
> this limitation is real, and oneness with Brahman is impossible.
>
> Here is where jaganmithyAtva comes in. If the world is unreal, the
> limitation of the jIva is unreal. Hence it is taught that ignorance, and
> its projection, the world, do not exist. There is no multiplicity here
> whatsoever, says the shruti. Like the appearance of the non-existent silver
> in the shell and the dream world within the dream, it is proven that the
> entire world is a mere appearance in Brahman.
>
> Until this unreality of the world is understood, the removal of limitation
> and ignorance from the jIva is impossible.
>
> Therefore, the establishment of the mithyAtva of the world is a necessary
> pre-condition for the establishment in oneness, which is the cause of
> moksha. It is no surprise therefore that AchAryas in the advaita tradition
> have taken great pains in establishing the mithyAtva of the world, prior to
> arriving at jIva brahma aikya.
>
> It is for this reason that the very first sentence of the advaita siddhi is
> this - तत्र अद्वैतसिद्धेर्द्वैतमिथ्यात्वसिद्धिपूर्वकत्वात् द्वैतमिथ्यात्मेव
> प्रथममुपपादनीयम् ।
>
> Kind regards,
> Venkatraghavan
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>
-- 
Sanju Nath