[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Caricature of Advaita, Shankaracharya, etc. by the Gaudiya head

[Krishna Kashyap]

As per Advaita, maya is anirvachaniya. Not explicable at all in any
rational way. To explain this, a famous story is given. An arrow of unknown
origin strikes a person lost in the woods somewhere. Would that person take
the arrow out of his chest and try to revive himself or think about where
did the arrow come from and at what angle? or is the arrow made of wood
with an iron tip or tungsten carbide??".

Obviously, the answer is he has to fix the problem and survive first.
Similarly, we in samsara should find a way out of this first.

In fact a simple answer given in the upanishads is:

भिद्यते हृदयग्रन्थिश्छिद्यन्ते सर्वसंशयाः ।
क्षीयन्ते चास्य कर्माणि तस्मिन्दृष्टे परावरे ॥ ८ ॥

bhidyate hṛdayagranthiśchidyante sarvasaṃśayāḥ |
kṣīyante cāsya karmāṇi tasmindṛṣṭe parāvare || 8 ||

8.
<https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/mundaka-upanishad-shankara-bhashya/d/doc145117.html#page-59>When
he that is both high and low is seen, the knot of the heart is untied; all
doubts are solved; and all his *karma* is consumed.

This verse states, in other words, not all logical questions can be
answered. We should focus on how to see the ONE, by seeing whom, all
problems are solved.

namaste.




*Best Regards,*

*Krishna Kashyap*




On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 4:27 PM Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> praNAms
> Hare Krishna
>
> My blunt observations to your multiple questions :
>
> My apologies for wading into this discussion and hijacking it. But as a
> student of Advaita, I have failed to explain to anyone who has asked me,
>
> where does Maya come from?
>
>
>   *   It is anivachaneeya (inexplicable), contextually sometime termed as
> Ishwara shakti and there is no difference between this shakti & shakta.
> mAya is Ishwarya of Lord.
>
> I understand asking why Maya exists is wrong as Maya is unreal, so the
> question of existence is moot.
>
>
>   *   As mentioned above we cannot categorically say it is either real or
> unreal.
>
> But what is the need for this transactional/Vyavaharika reality in the
> first place?
>
>
>   *   To realize the transcendental reality the transactional reality is
> the platform 😊 which we have to ‘use’ unfortunately.
>
> I see the cycle of Jiva as a result of Karma but Karma is valid when in
> the Jiva cycle. What is the purpose of the Jiva cycle itself ?
>
>
>   *   The purpose (purushArtha) is to realize we are beyond this cycle (
> i.e. ajaH, nityaH etc.)
>
> I thought at first Srishti "is" because without that there can be no
> experience of anything, but then the question arises if Srishti is the
> result of a desire in Brahman to "experience".
>
>
>   *   Srushti is for jeeva, who has to experience his karma phala in the
> jagat, Ishwara does this for the sake of jeeva and accepting that srushti
> is from Ishwara is ‘vedAnta maryAda’.  And all these prakriya-s
> (methodologies) are there to teach us the ultimate shruti siddhAnta i.e.
> ekamevAdviteeyatvaM of Atman which is our own svarUpa.
>
> That is also a confusing thought as Brahman can have no desire. Please
> help me understand.
>
>
> Ø     See the sUtra bhAshya, bhAshyakAra explained all these doubts.
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>