[Advaita-l] [advaitin] 'The Jiva is Mithya' - an article in English

[Kuntimaddi Sadananda]

PraNAms

 

A simple example is the moon andmoonlight. Moonlight is nothing but sunlight, only reflected by the moon. Now,one can ask - seeing the moonlight and say we are actually seeing sunlightonly via the moon. In addition, without the moon reflecting the sunlight, wecannot recognize the presence of sunlight where the moon is. The same appliesto the all-pervading consciousness and reflection by the mind - chidaabhaasa.Without the mind reflecting, the presence of the all-pervading consciousnesscannot be recognized. 

 

Is the moonlight (reflectedsunlight) the same as the original sunlight or different from theoriginal sunlight? In principle, it is the same, from the point ofunderstanding. In truth, one can say it is different in the sense thatreflection also depends on the reflecting medium - The reflection can be dullor bright. 

 

Hence meditation is looking at themoon, seeing moonlight and recognizing that it is only sunlight, based onScience. The same applies to the mind and consciousness exhibited by the mind(chidaabhaasa). The difficult part is one has to use the mind only to see theconsciousness exhibited by the mind and recognize, based on Vedanta that it isall-pervading consciousness. 

 

The example of the face and the mirrorin front is, therefore, slightly different from the moon's reflectionin sunlight. 

 

my 2c

 

Hari Om!

Sada

 


 

    On Saturday, November 23, 2024 at 07:59:31 AM GMT+5:30, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:  
 
 Namaste Chandramouliji,
Re: "Hence the term **abheda** is intended to mean **indistinguishable** rather than **identical** when the loci are the same."
The panchapAdikA (and vivaraNa) hold that the pratibimba itself is the bimba - ie they are absolutely identical. The abheda, in my understanding, is in the identical sense only.
The error is in the notion that the pratibimba is "in the mirror". So the adhyAsa in the case of the pratibimba bhrama is a samsarga adhyAsa, not a svarUpa adhyAsa, in their view.
In this sense (because they hold that the pratibimba is the bimba itself) they are pratibimba-satyatva-vAdins. The prakriyA is that the chakshu indriya rays emerge from the eyes, hit the mirror, are reflected back on to the face, and in this sense the eyes "see" the face as a reflection. The pratibimba is not an atirikta padArtha (a separate entity) to the bimba here. The siddhAnta lesha sangraha portion quoted by one of the posters in this thread describes this further.
VidyAraNya svAmi etc hold that the pratibimba is mithyA, ie it is different to the bimba - it is in atirikta padArtha that is created at the time of its perception.
Kind regards,Venkatraghavan 

On Sat, 23 Nov 2024, 10:11 H S Chandramouli, <hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:

Namaste.
My post was rejected . Hence resending
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 7:16 AM
Subject: Re: [advaitin] 'The Jiva is Mithya' - an article in English
To: <advaitin at googlegroups.com>
Cc: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>



Namaste.

I had mentioned in my earlier post that the term **abheda**concerning Bimba (Object) and Pratibimba (Image) mentioned in the AdvaitaSiddhi quote is in the context of jIva Brahma Aikya wherein the two are in thesame loci. All the subsequent quotes in this regard from other texts likeSiddhAnta Bindu etc are also in the same context. None of them is in thecontext of reflection in a mirror and an object placed in front. On the otherhand I had also cited a quote from VivaraNa Prameya Samgraha wherein the**bheda** between the two was specifically stated in respect of thisillustration of mirror and an object placed in front. In this illustration theloci of the two are different.

The difference between the two illustrations is thespacing/separation/gap  between the objectand its image. Where the loci are the same, the spacing is literally nil. It islike a very thin film pasted on a mirror. The film and its image would bepractically indistinguishable. While in the other instance the spacing issignificant/noticeable. Hence the term **abheda** is intended to mean**indistinguishable** rather than **identical** when the loci are the same. TheObject and its Image are literally fused together. 

That is exactly the position in respect of jIva BrahmaAilya. Brahman being all pervasive, the gap between **It**  and its **Image** (figurative usage) isnegligible. They are in the same loci. Hence the two are to be understood as**indistinguishable** and not **identical** in the Advaita Siddhi quote as wellas other quotes in the same context wherein the word **abheda** is used. 

My understanding.

Regards 







-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAEs%2B%2BdM2MD0sgkg%3D6E5Wj8KUZcD-C%2BhJd%3Dtrh1L9cMFj9BckYA%40mail.gmail.com.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAL34aEkf31f%3DJ59X4groDvS2VVgFLV3sxzfxbtCapNZJzS3_-A%40mail.gmail.com.