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

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Chandramouli ji,

Thank you ji.

I heard that portion, but it does not appear to me to be a statement of the
pratibimba *being* in the mirror, rather it is a statement of the
pratibimba *appearing* in the mirror.

Sri MDS clarifies this first by saying "rendaa pannaamalaye rendaa theriyum
padiyaa panradhu", which means "without making them two, it makes it appear
as though there are two".

If the pratibimba was really in the mirror, the statement "rendaa
pannaamalaye" would not be appropriate, because there would be two - the
bimba, here, and the pratibimba, there (in the mirror).

He then says "pratibimbamukham darpanathula irukku", which he immediately
qualifies by saying "darpanathula theriyarudhu illiya", which means "the
pratibimba is in the mirror - it appears to be in the mirror, does it
not?", which only explains the bhrama vyavahAra of the pratibimba appearing
in the mirror. It is not a statement of the pratibimba being in the mirror
itself.

Essentially the panchapAdikA / vivaraNa prakriyA of how the pratibimba
appears, does not permit the pratibimba to be located in the mirror, *in
fact*.

The actual VPS text (दर्पणेन चैकमेव मुखबिम्बप्रतिबिम्बरूपेण विभज्यते) also
uses the word darpaNa in the tritIyA (darpaNena) and not in the saptamI
vibhakti (darpaNe) - indicating that the mirror is the instrument (karaNe
tritIyA) for the pratibimba, not the locus (adhikaraNe saptamI) of the
pratibimba.

Kind regards,
Venkatraghavan


On Sat, 23 Nov 2024, 13:09 H S Chandramouli, <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste Venkat Ji,
>
> Please try following link for MDS talk.
>
> // https://www.mediafire.com/file/lp7hnqrx3sdxazc/VPS+-+09.mp3 //.
>
> Exact time is 3-00 hrs.
>
> Regards
>
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 10:18 AM Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Namaste Chandramouli ji,
>>
>> I don't have the CDs of Sri MDS' talks that you refer to, but that is ok
>> - if I do happen to get these in the future, will listen.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Venkatraghavan
>>
>> On Sat, 23 Nov 2024, 12:42 H S Chandramouli, <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Namaste Venkat Ji,
>>>
>>> Reg  // Can I ask how you took the text above to mean that the bimba
>>> and pratibimba are in different loci? //,
>>>
>>> Please refer to the talk by Sri MDS coverage of VPS, CD 9, Hrs 2-47
>>> onwards.
>>>
>>> Reg  // is it that Brahman and jIva must be understood to be in
>>> different loci because the bimba and pratibimba are in different loci?
>>> //,
>>>
>>> No. I am not sure if you have seen my earlier post where I have cited
>>> this part of VPS. It is that Brahman and jIva are in same loci while object
>>> in front of mirror and image are in different loci (as noted above).
>>>
>>> Reg  // totally your prerogative //,
>>>
>>> I just want to limit the scope of the discussion. I presume the above
>>> clarifications would suffice.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 9:54 AM Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Namaste Chandramouli ji
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 23 Nov 2024, 11:54 H S Chandramouli, <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Namaste Venkat Ji,
>>>>>
>>>>> The view that ** the pratibimba itself is the bimba - ie they are
>>>>> absolutely identical** does not affect my understanding in the
>>>>> current context of how the word **abheda** needs to be understood in the
>>>>> context of jIva Brahma Aikya vis-à-vis mirror-object reflection
>>>>> illustration. The two can be identical, but if they are in different
>>>>> locations or loci, then there is **bheda** between them to that extent.
>>>>>
>>>> I am not sure what you are suggesting here - is it that Brahman and
>>>> jIva must be understood to be in different loci because the bimba and
>>>> pratibimba are in different loci?
>>>>
>>>> This is stated in so many words in VivaraNa Prameya Samgraha itself
>>>>> which I had cited earlier and copied below for immediate reference.
>>>>>
>>>>> Vivarana Prameya Samgraha  (edition with hindi commentary), page 214
>>>>> states  //  ….दर्पणेन  चैकमेव मुखबिम्बप्रतिबिम्बरूपेण  विभज्यते …..//,
>>>>>
>>>>> // …..darpaNena  chaikameva mukhabimbapratibimbarUpeNa
>>>>> vibhajyate….. //,
>>>>>
>>>>> Translation VPS (Prof Suryanarayana Shastri) page 129  // ……and by the
>>>>> mirror the face which is but one is divided into prototype and reflection
>>>>> ….//.
>>>>>
>>>> Can I ask how you took the text above to mean that the bimba and
>>>> pratibimba are in different loci? Sure, the error is in assuming that the
>>>> pratibimba is "in the mirror", but the bimba pratibimbavAda of the
>>>> panchapAdikAkAra / vivaraNakAra does not admit that the pratibimba is,
>>>> *in* *fact*, "in the mirror". Rather, it is the bimba itself that is
>>>> seen as the pratibimba - meaning they are not in different loci.
>>>>
>>>> I have not checked in PanchapAdikA or VivaraNa separately. I have
>>>>> assumed that VPS presents the views of these texts only even if Swami
>>>>> Vidyaranya were to hold other views by himself.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not going into debate over what the word **identical** means in
>>>>> the context of this illustration. I am limiting myself to what the
>>>>> commentaries state about **bheda** and **abheda** as between object and
>>>>> image , and how they might be interpreted.
>>>>>
>>>> Again, I am not clear what you mean exactly by the above -  you do not
>>>> want to debate the meaning of the word "identical", and that is fine and
>>>> totally your prerogative, but then aren't you doing just that, when you are
>>>> talking what the abheda between the object and image means in the
>>>> commentaries, even if (I assume) you want to say that it does not mean
>>>> "identical"?
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Venkatraghavan
>>>>
>>>