[Advaita-l] Illusory nature of the waking and dream states

[Vinodh]

Namaskarams Sri Sadananda ji,

Thank you for your clarification. I agree with you on confusion as a result
of using the word "unreal" instead of "mithya".

Please pardon the lack of clarity in my language. 🙏

On Sun, Oct 17, 2021 at 6:58 PM Kuntimaddi Sadananda <
kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:

> PraNAms
>
> Just some clarification.
>
> Use of unreal word instead of mithyaa sometimes causes confusion.
>
> sat asat vilakShaNam - is the definition. Hence any expericeable entity
> cannot be unreal - Goudapada says experiencability, transactability,
> Utility are not the criteria for reality - only nityatvam or eternity is
> the criterion. trikaala abhaditam satyam.
>
> Dream is not a dream for the dreamer while he is in the dream.
>
> Just my 2c.
>
> Hari Om!
> Sadananda
>
>
>
>
> On Saturday, October 16, 2021, 09:49:56 PM EDT, Vinodh via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>
> Namaskaram Sri Venkatesh Murthy ji,
>
> The first objection you raise is no problem at all. As explained by
> Gaudapadacharya in the 9th kaarika of the Vaitathya prakarana and expanded
> on by Shankaracharya in his bhashya, even in the dream state, one may
> imagine or dream things that are later seen to be imagined within the
> dream, while there other things that are seen externally (within the dream)
> that are assumed to be relatively real, even though both of these things
> are inside the dream. Because one imagines something that one does not see
> externally through the senses, one assigns falsehood to the imagination and
> reality to what is seen externally through the senses (this applies whether
> we are talking about dream mind-body-senses or the waking
> mind-body-senses). Whatever is inferred through empiricism through the
> senses, one is prone to claim to be true, and whatever is not inferred
> through empiricism, one is prone to claim to be false. These two, the
> internal perception (anta-chitta) and the external perception
> (bahih-chitta), happen both in the dream and the waking states.
>
> There are several more objections like the one you raise that are addressed
> by the kaarikas and the bhashya, for example:
> - Reality of objects in the waking state is due to their utility of them.
> For example, water quenches the thirst, etc. However, dream objects cannot
> quench one's thirst in the waking state.
> - If both states are imagined and false, who is the one seeing them and
> what is the basis for smriti and jnaana?
> - Imaginations are confined to the time duration when they are imagined,
> however, objects seen externally are defined by two points of time (their
> time of creation and time of destruction, which is independent of the
> imagination).
> All these are sufficiently addressed through pure reasoning alone by
> Gaudapadacharya and Shankaracharya.
>
> The second objection you raise is not valid. The only thing Sruti is needed
> for is tell us the Truth. To establish the falsehood of dvaita, it is not
> required. As already mentioned, it is said so by Shankara Bhagapada himself
> in his bhashya of the Vaitathya Prakarana of Gaudapachaya's Karikas on the
> Mandukyopanishdad. He says that, even though it is said in the previous
> prakarana (Agama Prakarana) on the basis of the sruti (Mandukya Upanishad)
> that dvaita is unreal, it is now the intention of Gaudapadacharya to
> establish this same fact through pure reasoning alone without relying on
> scriptural authority. This in fact forms a firm basis for discussions with
> people who may not accept the authority of the sruti, like Buddhists, etc.
> However, after having rejected the reality of duality through reasoning, to
> establish the Truth regarding the Atma, the Sruti is indeed required and
> there is no other way other than the Sruti.
>
> Om tat sat 🙏
>
> On Sun, Oct 17, 2021 at 3:31 AM Venkatesh Murthy via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Namaste
> >
> > But in waking state we can reflect on dream state and say dream objects
> are
> > not real. This explanation of yours in the email is in waking state only,
> > But conversely we do not reflect in dream state on waking state and say
> > waking objects are not real. The Sruti only can tell us waking objects
> are
> > not real. It is not possible by reasoning alone. If it is possible  by
> > reasoning alone there is no need of Sruti Pramana. This is not the way of
> > Advaita.
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 16, 2021 at 5:01 PM Vinodh via Advaita-l <
> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Namaskarams,
> > >
> > > In Gaudapadacharya's karika on the Mandukyopanishad, he establishes the
> > > falsehood (or illusory nature) of both the waking and dream states
> > through
> > > reasoning alone (i.e., without relying on Sruti) in the Vaitathya
> > Prakarana
> > > (Vaitathya = falsehood) in verses 4-6.
> > >
> > > The reasoning goes as follows:
> > > 1. Things in a dream are unreal on account of them being confined
> within
> > > oneself.
> > > 2. Dream and waking states are similar on account of both of them
> having
> > > object perception, i.e., there is a seer and a seen (a subject-object
> > > relationship).
> > > 3. That which is non-existent in the beginning and in the end is
> > > necessarily non-existent in the middle.
> > > Therefore, just like all objects in a dream (including the dream
> > > mind-body-senses etc.), which did not exist just before falling asleep
> or
> > > just after waking up, and therefore are non-existent during the dream
> as
> > > well, all objects in a waking state (including the waking
> > mind-body-senses
> > > etc.), which did not exist just before waking up or just after falling
> > > asleep, are also non-existent during the waking state as well.
> > >
> > > The above is the only conclusive explanation I have come across that
> > > establishes the illusory nature of both the waking and dream states.
> > >
> > > When a superimposition (adhyaasa) occurs between the atma and the
> > illusory
> > > dream/waking mind-body, all interactions (vyavahara) in these states
> are
> > > wrongly imagined to be associated with the atma. The atma, being pure
> > > consciousness, is just a substratum on which the above dream/waking
> > > illusions appear and are witnessed, but it is itself untouched by these
> > > illusions like the rope is untouched by an illusion of a snake
> appearing
> > > above it.
> > >
> > > Om tat sat 🙏
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Archives: https://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
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards
> >
> > -Venkatesh
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Archives: https://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: https://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
>