Guest guest Posted July 22, 2004 Report Share Posted July 22, 2004 namaste shri chittaranjan-ji, Your presentations on Real and Unreal are scholarly. Your vocabulary is extensive. Yet, I do not see the word "mithya" used in your writings. If you have used it, I missed it. Is it a deliberate omission on your part and you do not accept that level of reality (unreality)? Regards Gummuluru Murthy -------------------------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 22, 2004 Report Share Posted July 22, 2004 Namaste Shri Murthy-ji, Thank you for your kind words Sir. I think I have used the words 'jagat-mithya' somewhere but I don't now recall where. But you are right, I believe that the world is real. I believe that unreality is either: 1. A string of words that don't have meaning and hence don't point to anything or 2. Something that is mistaken for another. >From whatever I have understood so far, I feel that the `unreality of the world' spoken of in Advaita is only an upaya to get to the Truth. It is the means of a path that goes to the Truth via the negative. Warm regards, Chittaranjan advaitin, "gmurthy_99" <gmurthy@m...> wrote: > > namaste shri chittaranjan-ji, > > Your presentations on Real and Unreal are scholarly. Your > vocabulary is extensive. Yet, I do not see the word "mithya" > used in your writings. If you have used it, I missed it. > Is it a deliberate omission on your part and you do not > accept that level of reality (unreality)? > > > Regards > Gummuluru Murthy > -------------------------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 22, 2004 Report Share Posted July 22, 2004 Hi Chittaranjan, It has been a pleasure to read your series. > > From whatever I have understood so far, I feel that the `unreality of > the world' spoken of in Advaita is only an upaya to get to the Truth. > It is the means of a path that goes to the Truth via the negative. > When Shruits are teaching in no uncertain terms that Parabrahman is indeed the Creator, how can another upAya that teaches that the work of Parabrahman is unreal, can take one to the Truth ? Regards, Jay N. - "Chittaranjan Naik" <chittaranjan_naik <advaitin> Thursday, July 22, 2004 12:52 PM Re: The Real and the Unreal - the series > Namaste Shri Murthy-ji, > > Thank you for your kind words Sir. > > I think I have used the words 'jagat-mithya' somewhere but I don't > now recall where. But you are right, I believe that the world is > real. > > I believe that unreality is either: > > 1. A string of words that don't have meaning and hence don't point to > anything > > or > > 2. Something that is mistaken for another. > > From whatever I have understood so far, I feel that the `unreality of > the world' spoken of in Advaita is only an upaya to get to the Truth. > It is the means of a path that goes to the Truth via the negative. > > Warm regards, > Chittaranjan > > > advaitin, "gmurthy_99" <gmurthy@m...> wrote: > > > > namaste shri chittaranjan-ji, > > > > Your presentations on Real and Unreal are scholarly. Your > > vocabulary is extensive. Yet, I do not see the word "mithya" > > used in your writings. If you have used it, I missed it. > > Is it a deliberate omission on your part and you do not > > accept that level of reality (unreality)? > > > > > > Regards > > Gummuluru Murthy > > -------------------------------- > > > > > Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > To Post a message send an email to : advaitin > Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages > > > Links > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 23, 2004 Report Share Posted July 23, 2004 Namaste Shri Jay, Thank you for your comments. They mean much to me especially as I recognise your vast scholarship and deep knowledge of the shastras. > When Shruits are teaching in no uncertain terms > that Parabrahman is indeed the Creator, how can > another upAya that teaches that the work of > Parabrahman is unreal, can take one to the Truth? I believe the upaya is to take one to the Substratum by the denial of all else through a process of 'not this, not this', and when the Substratum is known, all this is known because all this is not different than the Substratum. The negation of the world is not pure negation, but negation of the world as the Substratum (Brahman) which is in all this and still remains unknown. Warm regards, Chittaranjan advaitin, "Jay Nelamangala" <jay@r...> wrote: > Hi Chittaranjan, > > It has been a pleasure to read your series. > > > From whatever I have understood so far, I feel that > > the 'unreality of the world' spoken of in Advaita is > > only an upaya to get to the Truth. It is the means of > > a path that goes to the Truth via the negative. > > When Shruits are teaching in no uncertain terms that > Parabrahman is indeed the Creator, how can another > upAya that teaches that the work of Parabrahman > is unreal, can take one to the Truth ? > > Regards, > Jay N. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.