The perceptible world is not absolutely real - Srimad Bhagavatam

[V Subrahmanian]

One of the statements of Yama in this chapter:

https://www.transliteral.org/pages/z100517064042/view

सप्तमः स्कन्धः - अथ द्वितीयोऽध्यायः

यथा मनोरथः स्वप्नः सर्वमैन्द्रियकं मृषा ॥४८॥

Just as manoratha (imagination that is indulged in the waking) and dream are not real, so also this world which is perceived through all senses is not absolutely real.

अथ नित्यमनित्यं वा नेह शोचन्ति तद्विदः ।

Because of this, the wise do not grieve over anything, whether long standing or short-lived.

नान्यथा शक्यते कर्तृं स्वभावः शोचतामिति ॥४९॥

Because there is a rule that what is born must die.

We know from this saying of the Bhagavatam: The world is akin to dream, not real like the proverbial castle in the air. This premise stated by Veda Vyasa in the Bhagavatam is accepted with no compromise only in Advaita. This premise is contradictory to the doctrinal beliefs of other schools.

See Sridhara Swami's commentary below.

Om

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

The perceptible world, the world which we see through our indriya-s is indeed avidyAkalpita, Gandharva nagari, parichinna, asarvaM, abrahmam etc. hence it is called bhrAnti.  It is vyAvahArika, upAdhi parimita drushti (the vision limited within sense perception).    And there is another drushti i.e. shAstra drushti, pAramArthika drushti which shruti explains to help us to see / realize the world ‘as it is’ (not limited to only aparipUrNa upAdhi parichinna drushti) when shastra takes this perspective it says : idaM sarvaM yadayamAtma, brahmaivedaM amrutaM purastAt and this is what jnAni’s sarvAtmabhAva.  Without knowing this difference if we often announce blanket statement like:  prapancha is bhrAnti / abhAva / jeeva mAnasa pratyaya / manOkalpita etc.  if we are definitely on par with vijnAnavAdins,  who advocates ONLY ‘mind game’ 😊

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[V Subrahmanian]

The Advaitin will not make the mistake that you apprehend. For, the concept of Brahman being the adhishthana of the appearing jagat is well known to us.

A couple of years ago, there was a seminar on Buddhism, organised jointly by the Maha Bodhi Society and the Karnataka Sanskrit University, at the Institute of World Culture, B.P. Wadia Road, Basavanagudi, Bangalore. Speaking at the seminar, senior Madhva scholar  Dr. D. Prahladachar (who is now the head of the Vyasraja Matha) observed: "Both Buddhists and Advaitins admit the mithyatva of the world. The Advaitins say the substraturm of the world, which is but a superimposition, is Brahman as propounded by Vedanta. Buddhists do not admit any eternal substratum."

Here is a file containing an essay by Sri SSS on the comparative study of Advaita and Buddhism.  Gaudapadacharya's Karika and Nagarjuna's work are the texts.  This is in English:  

https://adbhutam.files.wordpress.com/2021/01/advaita-and-buddhism-sss.pdf 

Om Tat Sat

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

--
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+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581E2D23A858859CA6B0AE38437A%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

The Advaitin will not make the mistake that you apprehend. For, the concept of Brahman being the adhishthana of the appearing jagat is well known to us.

Ø     H, the brahman, is not ONLY substratum of the ‘nAma rUpa jagat he_is_the abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa of the jagat.  With this perspective only Advaita has been contrasted from that of Buddhists.  Buddhists deny the reality of external objects.  For example vijnAnavAdin says object what we perceive outside (external objects) is nothing but idea ( manOkalpita or manOratha which you quoted from bhagavata) since as per them, the’ idea’ of an external object and ‘perception’ of the same through indriya-s both are experienced together.  But as per shankara Advaita,  jagat,  ‘as it is’ not mere manOkalpita or jeeva mAnasa pratyaya, it is from parameshwara, it is parameshwara srushti, it is vedAnta maryAda to adore parameshwara is srushtikarta, so jagat in its own sphere, has its own adhishtAnam, upAdaanaM and nimittaM and that is nothing but parabrahman.  And shankara elsewhere in sUtra bhAshya exquisitely emphasizes that conceivability or inconceivability of the existence of a thing to be determined by the valid means of knowledge.  Here pramANa or valid means of knowledge is shAstra and that shAstra saying brahman is antaryAmi, upAdAna and nimitta kAraNa for the jagat ‘as it is’ and jeeva’s perception of this ‘as it is’ jagat’ is adhyasta like looking at the jagat as asarvaM, vicchinnaM, asarvaM etc. whereas,  in reality jagat is not distinct and does not exist ‘apart from brahman.  But what you implied by quoting bhAgavat is jagat is avidyAkalpita and subsequently when questioned this Buddhist like perspective you added NO NO brahman is the adhishtAnaM/kUtastha of this avidyAkalpita jagat!!  It is not so, I have quoted what Sri SSS said about it and how he contrasted this shruti pramANita tattvaM of jagat viz a viz manOkalpita jagat of vijnAnavAdin.  For that you said Sri SSS is contradicting and deviating himself etc.  So, kindly stop quoting Sri SSS in support of your views. 

Ø    And now the very important question is, can the brahman be the substratum of jeeva parikalpita jagat or illusionary jagat??  Brahman as per shAstra pramANa can be adhishtAnaM/ kUtasthaM, upAdAnaM, nimittaM of the nAmarUpAtmaka jagat he cannot be the adhishtAnaM to the Kalpita jagat of jeeva which he creates on his own due to avidyA.  For the Kalpita sarpa adhishtAnaM is nirmita rajju and nirmita rajju is NOT Kalpita nAma rUpa of jeeva because for the nirmita rajju parabrahman is the abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa.  This has been proved by kArya-kAraNa ananyatvaM.  Whereas Kalpita sarpa is kevala jeeva mAnasa pratyaya purely avidyAkalpita ‘adhyasta’ on rajju.  So your contention that brahman is the adhishtAnaM for the jeeva Kalpita jagat does not find any place in shruti, yukti and anubhava.  So jeeva Kalpita sarpa is due to jeeva’s avidyA /adhyAsa for that stage is brahma nirmita rajju.  And rajju is rajju only when jeeva perceiving it as sarpa. 

Ø    And finally, as I have been observing  many times, those who give the existence to bhAvarUpa avidyA in all the three states, comfortably saying jagat is Kalpita and abhAva, those who comfortably pasting the avidyAlesha and prArabdha karma to even paramArtha jnAni saying that jagat which is the stage for all this is manOvikAra….really strange !!

• Anyway, this is not for your subsequent reply prabhuji as I know you know answers to these objections as well 😊

[V Subrahmanian]

न हि शीतोष्णादि सकारणं प्रमाणैर्निरूप्यमाणं वस्तुसद्भवति ।  In BGB 2.16: Shankara says: the dualities (the whole world) that is perceptible to pramana-s (shrotra, tvak, chakshus, etc.) is non-existent. 

At the end of that commentary:  The advice for Arjuna:  त्वमपि तत्त्वदर्शिनां दृष्टिमाश्रित्य शोकं मोहं च हित्वा शीतोष्णादीनि नियतानियतरूपाणि द्वन्द्वानि ‘विकारोऽयमसन्नेव मरीचिजलवन्मिथ्यावभासते’ इति मनसि निश्चित्य तितिक्षस्व इत्यभिप्रायः ॥

You too, on the lines of the Tattvadarshis, behold the world as 'this is a transformation, non-existent, like the mirage water, appears to exist erroneously, mithyAvabhAsate. 

This is not Brahman's perception. The jiva's perception is taught by Shankara as mithya drishti. And the world perceived by sense organs is mithyA says Shankara. 

There are countless such statements from Shankara. Gandharvanagara, rajju-sarpa, maayaa pradarshana (magician's show) are some of the examples Shankara employs for the jagat drishti.  

You may look up the commentary translation of Sri SSS for the above. He does not deviate from Shankara on the above.

warm 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+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581637E3E7D4451223E91638437A%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

We have to see in the first chapter arjuna’s vishAda, his rAga-dvesha, his shOka-mOha, his perception of the battle field, relationship etc. with this backdrop look at the Lord’s advice in the second chapter to Arjuna then only we will come to know what is meant here by indriya janita perception i.e. through shrotra, tvak, Chakshu etc. which is non existent.  If the lord meant here battle filed itself non-existent, if the Lord meant what is there on the battle field is non existent like mirage water, he would have not asked and encouraged arjuna to go-ahead with the war.  See how Lord puts his effort to convince arjuna to continue with the battle ( verse 31-38 in the 2^nd Chapter itself).  So out of context quotes like this do not help to prove anything here.  Here jeeva (arjuna) parikalpita ‘srushti’ like shOka-mOha, vishAda, rAga-dvesha etc.  (due to his conditioned adjuncts) that is what denying by Lord and asking him to follow his kshAtra dharma taking everything in tranquility.  If everything is non-existent where is the question of following his kshAtradharma??  Again it is quite evident that this quote is not at all contextually relevant to prove the existence of jagat or otherwise.  It is better to try something else rather than quoting geeta which is very practical to prove the events on kurushetra battle  field 😊

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of V Subrahmanian
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2023 4:08 PM
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [advaitin] The perceptible world is not absolutely real - Srimad Bhagavatam

 

Warning

This email comes from outside of Hitachi Energy. Make sure you verify the sender before clicking any links or downloading/opening attachments. If this email looks suspicious, report it by clicking 'Report Phishing' button in Outlook. See the SecureWay group in Yammer for more security information.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te02Vvqw%3DEXoN7DJxtmqLGvKs1O%3D_JFc36b5ke9yNwAASg%40mail.gmail.com.

[সপ্ত Rishi]

I believe the 16 th verse is about nasato vidyate bhavo,then this is from that very bhashya.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581B9C8EC6A54D583CE844F8437A%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Exactly so, Subbuji. No Advaitin can ever be a Buddhist. It's like any Dvaitin pitting one against the other or a non-orthodox Advaitin pitting Bhamati against Vivarana and vice versa. They do justice to no system.

If ajnAnI's dRShTi is satya prapancha and only jnAnI's dRshti is mithyA prapancha, sAdhaka can never bridge that gap and will ever remain a sAdhaka somehow hoping to be a jnAnI! Only if sAdhaka's dRShTI is mithyA prapancha, he can take the journey of change of dRShTi from ajnAnI's prapanchasatyatva to jnAnI's prapancha-asatyatva/tucchatva, as mithyA alone has both components! Then he moves from ajnAnI to jnAnI 🙏🏽

gurupAdukAbhyAm,

--Praveen R. Bhat
/* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know That, owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */

[সপ্ত Rishi]

Pranam praveen ji,is my reference correct ?

--

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+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CACT7j-HvAzET2ar1p0FNb7mROWk4pz7wEPETgyXTex%3DZb--vcw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

By the way, the verse 2-16, nAsatO vidyate bhAvO nAbhAvO vidyate sataH is very potential quote to prove that if the bhAvarUpa avidyA is really existing thing as mUlavidyAvAdins advocates,  it cannot be eradicated by any means or any quantity of jnana as jnana does not have the power to create anything new nor it has the power of annihilating anything that is already positively ‘existing’.  😊

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar 

 

From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of V Subrahmanian

Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2023 4:08 PM
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [advaitin] The perceptible world is not absolutely real - Srimad Bhagavatam

 

Warning

This email comes from outside of Hitachi Energy. Make sure you verify the sender before clicking any links or downloading/opening attachments. If this email looks suspicious, report it by clicking 'Report Phishing' button in Outlook. See the SecureWay group in Yammer for more security information.

न हि शीतोष्णादि सकारणं प्रमाणैर्निरूप्यमाणं वस्तुसद्भवति ।  In BGB 2.16: Shankara says: the dualities (the whole world) that is perceptible to pramana-s (shrotra, tvak, chakshus, etc.) is non-existent. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te02Vvqw%3DEXoN7DJxtmqLGvKs1O%3D_JFc36b5ke9yNwAASg%40mail.gmail.com.

[সপ্ত Rishi]

An excerpt fromDictionary of Advaita Vedanta(author: late Rev.swami harshananda maharaj from Ramakrishna mission,Basavangudi,Bengaluru)

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581546A93ADCC0A922B90888437A%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Rishi prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Even I too have this book of Sri Harshanandaji maharaj.  Now I request you to elaborate or share your understanding what Swamiji meant when he said ‘after jnana jagat is cease to exist’. 

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CA%2B%3Dj2w-Z8NOYJYx6HNaMAoz21HZCETk6gKE%3DzqZtSzoB1K-8ZA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste Saptarshiji,

On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 5:01 PM সপ্ত Rishi <saptars...@gmail.com> wrote:

Pranam praveen ji,is my reference correct ?g%40mail.gmail.com.

The reference is correct but I am not sure what you are saying though. Many have claimed many things based on such reference. For example, a recent mail claimed that this shows that jnAna cannot take away mUlAjnAna at all! There is a nyAya that prAptasya eva pratiShedhaH, however, this sattA has never been claimed about mUlAjnAna; it is said to be yatkinchidbhAvarUpa, to negate the abhAvarUpapakSha, which only means mithyArUpa, which is sadbhinna and asadbhinna, and which is exactly what jnAna counters, completely!

Kind rgds,

[সপ্ত Rishi]

Just what i thought you would ask(this is a usual response to this 😊),as an uneducated fellow,the only thing which i am able to postulate,is that //just as water ceases to "exist" for someone who has known through investigating his/her vision of mirage,similarly the world ceases to "exist" after investigating his/her "vision" of the world"//,in both cases there is still a continuing samvit of the vision even after investigation but they do not conclude that those are existing objects ,rather postulate it as a "phenomenon" of the underlying reality.

May be i am completely wrong,but this is what i think

Sri krishnarpanamastu.🙏

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581BBD7CD6CE7DF034F35168437A%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[সপ্ত Rishi]

This in response to what Bhaskarji had asked.

[Akilesh Ayyar]

Bhagavan also asks Arjuna to fight even though at the end in Ch 18:59-61 Bhagavan says “it doesn’t matter what you decide, ishwara will whirl you around like a machine and you will fight, like it or not, compelled by your nature.” The whole thing from top to bottom is theater. If the battlefield is a mirage (and it is), then so too is the entire discourse to Arjuna and the attempted persuasion of him to fight also part of that mirage. The mirage includes Arjuna-considered-as-an-individual-person… 

Akilesh Ayyar

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581B9C8EC6A54D583CE844F8437A%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[V Subrahmanian]

Bhagavan resorts to adhyaropa-apavada prakriya to teach Arjuna. Shankara cites an earlier Acharya in the 13th chapter -

सच्छब्दप्रत्ययाविषयत्वात् असत्त्वाशङ्कायां ज्ञेयस्य सर्वप्राणिकरणोपाधिद्वारेण तदस्तित्वं प्रतिपादयन् तदाशङ्कानिवृत्त्यर्थमाह —  This is the adhyaropa shloka: 

  

सर्वतःपाणिपादं तत्सर्वतोक्षिशिरोमुखम् ।
सर्वतःश्रुतिमल्लोके सर्वमावृत्य तिष्ठति ॥ १३ 

तथा हि सम्प्रदायविदां वचनम् — ‘अध्यारोपापवादाभ्यां निष्प्रपञ्चं प्रपञ्च्यते’ ( ? )  In the maxim cited by Shankara, the word 'nishprapancham' is crucial. Brahman which is nishprapancham is taught by superimposing the world on Brahman, in order to help the aspirant appreciate the existence of Brahman, and then, after the purpose is achieved, the aropita prapancha is negated - apavaada. 

This is the apavaada shloka:  

उपाधिभूतपाणिपादादीन्द्रियाध्यारोपणात् ज्ञेयस्य तद्वत्ताशङ्का मा भूत् इत्येवमर्थः श्लोकारम्भः —

 व्याख्या 

सर्वेन्द्रियगुणाभासं सर्वेन्द्रियविवर्जितम् ।
असक्तं सर्वभृच्चैव निर्गुणं गुणभोक्तृ च ॥ १४ ॥

Gaudapada too says: 

मृल्लोहविस्फुलिङ्गाद्यैः सृष्टिर्या चोदितान्यथा । 

उपायः सोऽवताराय नास्ति भेदः कथञ्चन ॥ १५ ॥

The srushti taught by the shruti as done by Brahman, Gaudapada says, is an upaya to teach the abheda to the aspirant. In truth no srishti ever took place. 

Shankara says in the bhashya:

 स्वप्नवदात्ममायाविसर्जिताः सङ्घाताः, घटाकाशोत्पत्तिभेदादिवज्जीवानामुत्पत्तिभेदादिरिति । इत एव उत्पत्तिभेदादिश्रुतिभ्य आकृष्य इह पुनरुत्पत्तिश्रुतीनामैदम्पर्यप्रतिपिपादयिषयोपन्यासः मृल्लोहविस्फुलिङ्गादिदृष्टान्तोपन्यासैः सृष्टिः या च उदिता प्रकाशिता कल्पिता अन्यथान्यथा च, स सर्वः सृष्टिप्रकारो जीवपरमात्मैकत्वबुद्ध्यवतारायोपायोऽस्माकम् , यथा प्राणसंवादे वागाद्यासुरपाप्मवेधाद्याख्यायिका कल्पिता प्राणवैशिष्ट्यबोधावताराय ; तदप्यसिद्धमिति चेत् ; न, शाखाभेदेष्वन्यथान्यथा च प्राणादिसंवादश्रवणात् । 

Shankara calls that shruti taught srishti to be akin to a dream, that one creates on a daily basis. The Chandogya and Mundaka analogies used by the shruti to teach srishti, Shankara says, is kalpita.  He cites the case of an imaginary prana-indiriyas conversation of the Prshnopanishat, aimed at teaching the excellence of prana among the components of the body-mind-complex. Shankara says this story is kalpita and in the same way the shruti stated brahman-created srishti is also kalpita. 

Om Tat Sat 

[Akilesh Ayyar]

Yes exactly.

Akilesh Ayyar

--
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+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te2oPUzLNLNQ6dFXGUFHoj-90BMbSd1MKna%2BJgf4XG9ZBQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear Subbuji,

That is why Lord Krishna told Arjuna as follows, and He gave a similar message to Uddhava also.

आदावन्ते च यन्नास्ति वर्तमानेऽपि तत्तथा 

वितथैः सदृशाः सन्तोऽवितथा इव लक्षिताः |

In his Mandukya karika, Shri Gaudapadacharya quoted verbatim, what the Lord Arjuna.

Regards,

Sunil KB

--

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+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te25ZyGqLcyccYi4uF1oinabzM6DamOv27YqA51%2By0ZKYQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Rishi prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Kindly don’t think otherwise for asking that question.  I am not even a student of Advaita in any serious way 😊 Why I asked that curious question is, what exactly does it mean when world is ceases to exist after svarUpa jnana??  Is the jnana destroys the already existing thing??  Or this jnana would fetch us the ‘correct’ knowledge of an ‘existing thing’??  As you know shankara says jnana reveals the correct knowledge of an existing thing.  The correct knowledge of existing thing here in this case / context is the svarUpa / adhishtaanam of the perceived world.  In other words, the essential identity of the universe with brahman.  Shankara in ArambharaNAdhikaraNa bhAshya explicitly explains the universe as an effect is non-different from the cause or brahman and essentially one with brahman.  Shankara gives some empirical examples like ghatAkAsha, patAkAsha, mrutagrushNa etc.  and declares that all this universe of manifold things such as the experienced and the experiencers donot exist apart from brahman.  So here ceasing or ending of the existing jagat not to be taken in literal sense (as you have correctly pointed out) but what that ceases is our limited vision or qualified perception of jagat that ceases to exist.  And with the bhuma drushti / samyak drushti / sarvAtmabhAva what he realizes is bhOktA, bhogyaM preritAraM cha matvA sarvaM prOktaM trividhaM brahma me tat ( sUtra bhAshya) here the triple distinction of the experiencer, experienced and the ruler is declared to be taught as being the nature of ONE brahman. 

 

This is just ramblings from another not full time student of Vedanta.  You are well come to disagree with it. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CA%2B%3Dj2w8nm_DFHufxEPjUtM-ENQKcFUe9duoZpD_v6dsgxuy0Xg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Akhilesh Ayyar prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Bhagavan also asks Arjuna to fight even though at the end in Ch 18:59-61 Bhagavan says “it doesn’t matter what you decide, ishwara will whirl you around like a machine and you will fight, like it or not, compelled by your nature.”

 

• Yes, here Ishwara is the controller / ruler / jnAnadAta to ajnAni arjuna who is a victim of rAga-dvesha thinking that he is ‘going’ to kill his kith and kin and from that accruing pApa karma phala.  Lord’s all efforts here to efface this misconception of Arjuna who was talking like learned one😊 So it is a wise advice that Lord given to Arjuna to fight the battle. 

 

The whole thing from top to bottom is theater. If the battlefield is a mirage (and it is), then so too is the entire discourse to Arjuna and the attempted persuasion of him to fight also part of that mirage. The mirage includes Arjuna-considered-as-an-individual-person… 

 

Ø     This is clear digression from what is being discussed here, yes everything here is just like mirage and that includes Lord as jnAni / Ishwara who is giving the teaching to Arjuna.  So adhyArOpa on brahman not only battle field/arjuna as ajnAni etc. but ALSO Krishna as jnAni / Lord and his upadesha as well because of the simple fact that there is no jnana – ajnAna vyavahAra in the paramArthika.  The arjuna vishAda being talked here is ofcourse from the vyAvahArika adhyArOpita drushti only so is geetOpadesha from Lord 😊 And adhyArOpa does not mean there is something called ‘A’ existing separately at some place and  on that we super impose something else called ‘B’ (which is not ‘A’) to know ‘A’ and later on, after the purpose is served, we remove (apavAda) that ‘B’ thing (again not ‘A’ but as a separate thing called ‘B’) to know ‘A’!!??    This cannot be possible since as we know there is nothing exist apart from A and that A is aprameya.  What is adhyArOpita here is jeeva’s parichinnatvaM, asarvatvaM, abrahmatvaM etc. due to avidyA and what shAstra apavAda is what is there is nothing but braman, sarvaM and paripUrNam.  See br.up. bhA. 1.4.10 for example : tathA ihApi abrahmatvaM asarvatvaM cha avidyAkrutameva nivartyatAM brahma vidyayA na tu paramArthikaM vastu kartuM nivartayituM va arhati brahma vidyA.  Arujna drushti here is parichinna drushti, asarvAtma / abrahma drushti / avidyA timira drushti, lord highlight this and gives upadesha what is there in reality and what needs to be done as a kshatriya.  And here please note even taken this whole scenario from adhyArOpa apavAda drushti, it does not prove that whole kurukshtra battle filed and lord etc. are mere Arjuna’s Kalpana but it is the contention of some who says everything is jeeva maanasa pratyaya which is as good as Buddhists vijnAnavAda.  Yes, here Arjuna’s mithAdrushti does not denied but it is the subjective problem due to which he perceived the whole battle filed  wrongly!! Lord through his upadesha eradicated this misconception of Arjuna. 

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Akilesh Ayyar]

Namaste Bhaskarji,

The point is basically that the moment you say the word “jagat” you are already in vyavahara. Only when you have the knower-known-knowing trio do you have the idea of a world. A world implies distinction. To say that brahamn is the substrate of this world, therefore, is a vyavahara teaching. 

When jagat is seen for what it really is, it cannot be differentiated as “jagat” anymore. Does it then still exist? Does it not exist? These questions are themselves products of avidya only — thus why Sankara calls maya neither real nor unreal. 

The idea behind Bhagavan’s teaching of Arjuna is to admit as a provisional premise the so-called existence for the so-called jagat… in order first to contrast it with its substrate and cause. But then, by showing their identity… to destroy that very idea. 

This does not mean that “the world” is in truth Arjuna’s idea alone. It means “the world as Arjuna imagines it” is Arjuna’s idea alone. The world in truth is non-different from Brahman — but that non-difference means that it cannot even be spoken of as world!

Akilesh Ayyar

Spiritual guidance - http://www.siftingtothetruth.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+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581AA487388B30FFA192139843BA%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Akhilesh Ayyar prabhuji

Hare Krishna

• Happy to note that more agreement here in this mail between you and me 😊

The point is basically that the moment you say the word “jagat” you are already in vyavahara.

•  Yes, it is like the moment we say/think that we are jeeva, we are already under the influence of avidyA vyavahAra!!

Only when you have the knower-known-knowing trio do you have the idea of a world. A world implies distinction. To say that brahamn is the substrate of this world, therefore, is a vyavahara teaching. 

Ø     Yes prabhuji you are right.  Shankara in geeta bhAshya (2-69) very clearly says the same thing : all pramANa-s are such only upto the realization of Atman and subsequent to this there can be no talk of the means and objects of knowledge.  The untya pramANa takes away the very nature of being a pramAtru and at the same time invalidates itself as a means just as a means of knowledge gained in a svapna does on one’s jagrat.  bhOktru, bhOgya, bhOjya vyavahAra sublimated in paramArtha and what jnAni realizes is he is anna, annaada and shlokakarta.  pramAtru-pramANa-prameya vyavahAra adyArOpita in brahman and brahman is sarva vyavahArAteeta.

When jagat is seen for what it really is, it cannot be differentiated as “jagat” anymore.

•  And jagat is just another name given to that tattva which is also called Atma, brahma, Chaitanya, bhUma, satyaM, jnAnaM, anantaM etc. it cannot be called by any particular name and it cannot be identified with any particular form.  Shruti says yato vAcho nivartante apraapya manasa saha….But when we use shuddhAntaH karaNa to know / realize this nAma rUpAteeta tattva, we call it with some name for our convenience. 

Does it then still exist? Does it not exist? These questions are themselves products of avidya only — thus why Sankara calls maya neither real nor unreal. 

Ø     Yes, this is one of the aspects of mAya, some times mAya addressed as brahmAnanya, sometimes addressed as Ishwara shakti, some times addressed as concocted by avidyA and sometimes it is also addressed as avyAkruta beeja shakti for the nAmarUpAtmaka jagat.  So, as per the context we have to deduce the meaning of the term called ‘mAya’. 

The idea behind Bhagavan’s teaching of Arjuna is to admit as a provisional premise the so-called existence for the so-called jagat… in order first to contrast it with its substrate and cause. But then, by showing their identity… to destroy that very idea. 

Ø     As you know the geeta is fine blend of jnana, bhakti, karma and raja yoga and ultimately teaching Atman’s ekamevAdviteeya tattvam. 

This does not mean that “the world” is in truth Arjuna’s idea alone.

•  Yes

It means “the world as Arjuna imagines it” is Arjuna’s idea alone.

 

• Yes, yes (double S 😊)

The world in truth is non-different from Brahman — but that non-difference means that it cannot even be spoken of as world!

 

Ø     Yes, as said above same applies to jeeva.  Both statements are there to show the non-difference between jeeva-brahman and jagat-brahma.  Jeevo brahmaiva na apara, AtmaivedaM sarvaM, vAsudevaH sarvaM, brahmaivedaM vishvaM.  When we know there exists neither jeeva nor jagat apart from brahman and at the same time brahman is neither jeeva nor jagat the purpose of shruti siddhAnta served 😊