Gummuluru Murthy/illusion and Reality

[Guest guest]

Dan: Thank you for your words showing that illusion is not real from

the first. What doesn't exist, never existed. The world of

appearance is Brahman, is Totality. The illusion is that somehow

it is other than Totality itself. As illusions within illusion,

we dreamers believe ourselves to be constructing dreams that

can be owned. None of this intereferes with Totality, as the

dreamers were never other than Totality all the time - there

was nothing to own as everything already was Total from before

any imagined "beginning" of time. This fits with a Qabalistic

understanding of the very titling of the book "B'reysheet"

(mistranslated as Genesis). B'reysheet means literally

"with beginning", although is typically translated as

"in the beginning". "With beginning" can be conceptualized

self and world. When "beginning" itself is understood as illusory,

the Truth that is timeless stands alone.

-- Peace --

 

>>Gummuluru Murthy:

>> Further to my post of yesterday under this thread and touching

on the vanishing or otherwise of the jagat on realization,

I give below a verse from GauDapAdA's MANDUkya kArikA (MK)

which touches on this aspect. This verse conclusively shows

that the phenomenal world is not there to start of; and if

it is there to start of, it would cease to exist.

Here below is the MK verse and shrI shankara's commentary

on this (translation from swami GambhIrAnanda).

 

prapa~nco'yadi vidyeta nivarteta na saMshayaH

mAyAmAtraM idaM dvaitam.h advaitaM paramArthataH

 

It is beyond doubt that the phenomenal world would cease

to be if it had any existence. All this duality that is

nothing but mAyA, is in Absolute Truth but non-duality.

 

If one is to be awakened (to a higher state) by negating

the phenomenal world, how can there be non-duality so long

as the phenomenal world persists? The answer is: Such

indeed would be the case yadi prapa~ncaH vidyeta, if

the phenomenal world had existence. But being superimposed

like a snake on a rope, it does not exist. Na saMshayaH,

there is no doubt; that if it had existed, nivarteta,

it would cease to be. Certainly, it is not that the snake,

fancied on the rope through an error of observation, exists

there in reality and is then removed by correct observation.

Snake is never there. Verily, it is not that the magic

conjured up by a magician exists in reality and is then

removed on the removal of the optical illusion of its

witness. Similarly, mAyAmAtraM idaM dvaitaM, this duality

that is nothing but mAyA, and is called the phenomenal

world; is, paramArthaH, in supreme truth; advaitam,

non-dual, just like the rope and the magician.

Therefore, the purport is that there is no such thing

as the world which appears or disappears.

Just like the snake is never there, the jagat is never

there.

I think the logic is impeccable. I now understand from this

verse that brahman-jagat superimposition is in no way

different from the rope-snake superimposition, although

more difficult to recognize.