Real and the Unreal

[Guest guest]

Adi Behnji said in her posting:

 

<<<<But, vedantins like to call MAya "unreal" (ayathartha) and anirvachaniya (

inexplainable). This is because for them the whole universe is 'unreal' (jagat

mithya)!>>>

 

In my humble opinion, Mithya is not Unreal. In fact there is no “Unreal” at all.

Dream becomes Unreal on waking up only. During Dream it is as “real” as waking

state experience. It is “Swakale Astivad Bhadi” i.e. at the given time it

appears as real, but on enquiry we come to know it was just appearance.

Appearance where? All floating in Consciousness, which is the Swaroopa of “I”

Atma. We cannot say World is “Naasti” but world is “Astivad Bhati” i.e. it

shines as if it is real.

 

Vedanta does not say world is Unreal, but World is Mithya, i.e. it has no

independent existence, and it is just an appearance, (forms with names) on the

substratum, Brahman. Mithya is not Unreal. We need not rather we cannot negate

Mithya. Vandhya Putra is not even Mithya; it is Tucham. I think world is not

like Vandhya Putra.

 

Mithya is not not-useful. Mithya is useful to another Mithya. So Mithya has its

own place as all one can think of, see, hear, taste, touch, grasp, etc. are in

the realm of Mithya and the one who can do all these is also Mithya! Apart from

Brahman or Consciousness or Athma whatever is there have only the Status of

Mithya, and it is not Unreal.

 

Sri Chitta Ranjanji wrote:

 

<<I have often wondered about the origins of the

 

word "sublation", and while I have been using it as an equivalent of the word

"negation", I could not avoid feeling discomfort with the connotation that it

has indicating complete effacement.>>

 

My understanding is (I wonder whether our learned members will agree) negation

used in Vedanta, does not mean negating the world, which includes the “negator”

also. What is really meant, is negation of the Mithya Gnana, i.e. the knowledge

we have about the world and ourselves need to be negated rather corrected, as

such knowledge has ignorance as its basis. Upanishads in essence unfolds only

this much i.e. there is an error in our judgment about ourselves and the world

out there including Iswara. Self Knowledge corrects this error. Our Swaroopa is

unfolded i.e. our unchanging, unborn and immortal Swaroopa (I cannot get an

equivalent word for Swaroopa in English Language), which is satyam Gnanam

Anantham and since it is Anantham Satyam and Anantham Gnanam, it lacks nothing

and therefore it is “Anandam” i.e. happiness(?) itself. I do not think equating

Anandam to Happiness can convey the meaning of Anandam. It is Sukham or where

there is neither happiness nor unhappiness. Maybe “Peace”.

 

Warm Regards, Hari Om

 

Mani

 

 

 

 

 

New and Improved Mail - Send 10MB messages!