mithya in Advaita

[Guest guest]

Namaste, I am neither Dvaitin nor Advaitin but my own intuition

leans towards Advaita. I would like to better understand the

importance of mithya in Advaita.

A person new to Gita or Upanishads will try to follow Karma yoga.

All Karma yoga is about appreciating the laws of the mithya jagat.

Even the most eminent Vedantin - Swami Dayananda says - all prakruti

is bhagavan but bhagavan is not prakruti. Swamiji says there is

tremendous order in prakruti and appreciating that order is

recognizing Ishvara. Then, why give so much importance to mithya

nature of jagat just because it disappears in deep sleep. Not

knowing Brahman or Ishvara, I can only start with pratyaksha and it

is such a remarkable creation that it propels me to think about the

origin and cause of this universe. I know that sabda pramana or Veda

pramana provides us knowledge of Brahman but this mithya jagat

exists even for a jnani. I can't say how he (jnani) feels but it is

said he sees the universe in his atman and atman in the universe. I

don't know what that means but it makes the universe even more real

because it is based on Atman. Swami Dayananda often says that if I

say "That is a tree", the tree part is mithya but the "is a" part is

sat - the atman. I don't know what is the meaning of pure sat or

pure existence but it roughly means that without the Atman, the tree

has no existence so tree is mithya. This "isness" is same has

cognition or awareness, right ? Then why is the tree mithya - infact

it is absolute reality because awareness or atman sees a tree. How

can there be mis-apprehension in atman or awareness ?

 

with best regards,

Om Namah Sivaya

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "mahadevadvaita"

<mahadevadvaita wrote:

>

Shri Mahadevadvaita ji writes:

Namaste, I am neither Dvaitin nor Advaitin but my own intuition

leans towards Advaita. I would like to better understand the

importance of mithya in Advaita.

A person new to Gita or Upanishads will try to follow Karma yoga.

All Karma yoga is about appreciating the laws of the mithya jagat.

Even the most eminent Vedantin - Swami Dayananda says - all prakruti

is bhagavan but bhagavan is not prakruti. Swamiji says there is

tremendous order in prakruti and appreciating that order is

recognizing Ishvara.

 

Response:

That is the most appropriate thing to do. Karma Yoga fructifies in

Upasana Yoga which is none other than recognizing Ishwara in the

Creation and appreciating Him and contemplating on Him. Upasana Yoga

fructifies in granting the capability to step into Jnana Yoga.

 

You say:

Then, why give so much importance to mithya nature of jagat just

because it disappears in deep sleep. Not knowing Brahman or Ishvara,

I can only start with pratyaksha and it

is such a remarkable creation that it propels me to think about the

origin and cause of this universe.

 

Response:

The culmination of Jnana Yoga is in the realization that the Origin

and Cause of this Universe is none other than oneself. Thus, the

quest is quite in order. The earlier steps are prescribed because it

is impossible to straight away grasp the Highest Advaitic teaching.

Hence the need for the preparatory steps.

 

You further say:

I know that sabda pramana or Veda pramana provides us knowledge of

Brahman but this mithya jagat exists even for a jnani. I can't say

how he (jnani) feels but it is said he sees the universe in his atman

and atman in the universe. I don't know what that means but it makes

the universe even more real because it is based on Atman. Swami

Dayananda often says that if I say "That is a tree", the tree part is

mithya but the "is a" part is

sat - the atman. I don't know what is the meaning of pure sat or pure

existence but it roughly means that without the Atman, the tree has

no existence so tree is mithya.

 

Reply:

A comprehensive response to all the above observations would be this:

When it is said that this mithya jagat exists even for a jnani, the

purport is this:

Let us know about this from an analogy that Swami Pramarthananda

gives: Initially a person believes that the sun rises and sets.

Later after acquiring the correct knowledge that such is not the

case, even while experiencing the rising and setting of the sun, he

continues in the knowledge of the truth behind that phenomenon.

Another example given is, while we experience that the earth is

stationary, we know that such is not the case. Similarly, the Jnani

knows through intimate experience (Sakshatkara) that the universe is

not apart from himself, that it is non-different from himself. His

continuing to see the universe does not affect his experiential

knowledge that it is mithya. It is like knowing that the ring or

chain is non-different from gold.

 

As to the mithyatva of the objective side of the world, a careful

study of the Acharya's commentary for the Gita verse II.16 will give

a perfect explanation. Therein He explains with examples and further

questions, the mithyaatva of the objective universe and the Truth

underlying it. In each successive cognition of a pot, a cloth, etc.,

He points out that the pot, cloth, etc. keep alternating whereas

the 'is', the Sat, does not alternate. That which changes is mithya

and that which is unchanging is the Satyam. The exercise for a

Vedanta sadhaka is to contemplate on the objectless existence, the

Pure Sat.

 

When you say '……but it makes the universe even more real because it

is based on Atman', a re-look at this very observation gives the

answer. That which is based on Atman, in Vedanta, is that which is

superimposed on it. Just like the pot, cloth, etc., that we saw

above, the universe is a superimposition on Atman and therefore

mithya. Further, that which forms the basis for the superimposed

universe is the substratum and is satyam. In the rope-snake example,

the snake has no existence as apart from the existence of the rope.

Even when snake appears, this is the truth. But the rope does not

have a borrowed existence in the example. Likewise, the

universe, 'based' on Atman, does not have an existence separate from

that of Atman. This is the way the Jnani knows regarding the world-

appearance that persists.

 

You conclude saying:

This "isness" is same as cognition or awareness, right ? Then why is

the tree mithya – infact it is absolute reality because awareness or

atman sees a tree. How can there be mis-apprehension in atman or

awareness?

with best regards,

Om Namah Sivaya

 

Reply:

Isness could be differentiated from awareness in the sense that just

as in the above example we saw that pot, cloth, etc. are all

alternating and therefore mithya and sat alone is satyam, in the

awareness of a pot, cloth, etc., the 'awared' pot, cloth, etc., being

alternating in each cognition, are mithya and the 'awareness' that

persists in all these cognitions is alone the real Awareness. This

is actually the meaning of the Mahavakya 'Prajnaanam Brahma'. Thus,

Vedanta teaches, when Atman sees a tree, the tree is not constantly

awared and therefore is mithya. Further, there is the concept of

subject-object duality. Pure Awareness being infinite, cannot

apprehend an object that is different from itself. Finally, the

misapprehension in atman is considering the objective universe as

different from oneself, as really existing. True apprehension

according to Vedanta is to see the universe as not having a separate

existence apart from Atman or Consciousness or Awareness. Again, one

should remember the gold-chain or clay-pot examples to clearly

comprehend this. That, in essence, is mithyatva and Satyatva in

Advaita.

 

Pranams and best regards,

subbu

[Guest guest]

Namaste All.

 

Shri Mahadevadvaita Ji's query-

advaitin/message/31848

Shri Subrahmanian Ji's reply filled with deep and

wonderful insights:-

advaitin/message/31857

 

 

>All Karma yoga is about appreciating the laws of the

>mithya jagat.

 

The idea of appreciation of such laws is wonderful

indeed!

Wonderful because, their appreciation leads to a

wonderful jagat where one might say, "when the jagat

is so wonderful as Isvara Himself, where every atom

and every person is seen as Isvara himself",

"mOksha needs no separate seeking".

 

The process in Karma Yoga enables one to distinguish

between the 'Real (Permananet)' and the 'Unreal

(Dependent and changing)', while at the same time

showing their unity in the jagat as much as in

Ishvara.

 

>why is the tree mithya?

 

As Swami Vivekananda said in a different context,

and relating it to the 'tree' here,

'If the whole universe merges into one as in

praLaya, then can we say that this tree will still

retain its separate existence? Certainly not.'

 

Hence it is said that the tree is mithya,

and jagat is mithya, to put it in simple terms.

In reality, they always are inseparable from Isvara

and are said to be 'anirvacanIya'.

 

Kind regards,

Raghava

 

 

________

India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new

http://in.answers./

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "subrahmanian_v"

<subrahmanian_v wrote:

>

> advaitin, "mahadevadvaita"

> <mahadevadvaita@> wrote:

> >

> Shri Mahadevadvaita ji writes:

> Namaste, I am neither Dvaitin nor Advaitin but my own intuition

> leans towards Advaita. I would like to better understand the

> importance of mithya in Advaita.

 

Namaste all

 

As a supplement to Subbu-ji's clear explanations of the concept of

mithyA in advaita, may I also draw your attention to the followiing

messages on our list, dated Dec. 3 2002?:

#s 15372 and #15373.

 

PraNAms to all advaitins

profvk

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk

wrote:

>

> advaitin, "subrahmanian_v"

> <subrahmanian_v@> wrote:

> >

> > advaitin, "mahadevadvaita"

> > <mahadevadvaita@> wrote:

> > >

> > Shri Mahadevadvaita ji writes:

> > Namaste, I am neither Dvaitin nor Advaitin but my own intuition

> > leans towards Advaita. I would like to better understand the

> > importance of mithya in Advaita.

>

> Namaste all

>

> As a supplement to Subbu-ji's clear explanations of the concept of

> mithyA in advaita, may I also draw your attention to the followiing

> messages on our list, dated Dec. 3 2002?:

> #s 15372 and #15373.

>

> PraNAms to all advaitins

> profvk

>

On Cause and Effect

 

Namaste Prof.VK ji,

 

The references given by you for the Avidya/mithya topics made very

nice reading. Your 'comment' on Avidya is the one that is

traditionally acceptable. Thanks for that.

 

(From Message Nol.15372 of Prof.VK ji):

 

Comment. The term `avidyA' is the veiling of the Self. It is not

just absence of vidyA, knowledge. It is the consciousness `I do

not know'. The real Self of man has nothing to do with the

vicissitudes of existence. By this ignorance of not knowing who

the real Self is, man confounds his outer self with the real

Self. An identification with the buddhi makes him the cogniser.

An identification with the mind makes him the thinker. An

identification with all forms of vitality like prANa, makes him

the doer. Thus the entire samsAra is due to this avidyA. Is it

something that is absolutely real? No, because it vanishes the

moment one is enlightened. Is it something that is absolutely

non-existent? No, because we have the consciousness `I do not

know'. Thus it is neither existent nor non-existent. It cannot

be both, because that would imply self-contradiction. That is

why the scriptures say that it is (`anirvacanIya') undecidable.

The only thing we can be sure is that it will disappear once by

God's Grace the very same consciousness `I do not know' gives

place to the consciousness `I am the Self'.

 

Here is a quote from your Message No.15373:

 

It is taken from Vidyaranya's

introduction to the study of Upanishads. The English

translation is by Alladi Mahadeva Sastry.

 

" …. A thing is said to be unknown, as the Vedantic authorities

declare, when veiled by ajnana or ignorance; and it is said to

be known when illumined by the organ of knowledge. And both

these facts are illumined by the Witness, by the unfailing

Consciousness. Every thing always presents itself to the

Witness, to Consciousness, either as known or unknown. Such is

the main truth taught in the scriptures. Thus it is

Consciousness by which a thing is realized as unknown; and by

all organs of knowledge we cognize what has remained unknown. ….

The result of a thing being unknown is the veiling of the thing

and nothing else. The inert unconscious matter being in itself

veiled and dark, how can there be a new veiling of it? On the

other hand, Consciousness, which is luminous, is affected by

something else veiling it, just as, a white cloth is affected

by the dyeing ink. Rahu may darken the moon, never the dark

clouds. Thus it is Consciousness that is the unknown and the

inert matter is formed of ajnana. Whatever is the cause or the

effect should be regarded as the inert matter"

(I do not quite comprehend the inclusion of the words `the

cause or' in this last sentence. I am happy with the sentence

without these three words! -- VK)

"By the whole of that inert matter the self-luminous

Consciousness is veiled. By Consciousness thus veiled, both

itself and the inert matter shine forth, just as both the moon

and Rahu – the shadow eclipsing it – shine by the moon. Thereby

Consciousness neither becomes extinct nor loses its light, any

more than the moon.

 

Regarding your observation above:, (I do not quite comprehend the

inclusion of the words `the cause or' in this last sentence. I am

happy with the sentence without these three words! -- VK)

here is an explanation:

 

The topic is the avidya being a vishaya for the Atman. This is

explained with the example of Rahu enveloping the Moon. While Rahu

is the 'avidya' in the example, the very Rahu being visible due to

the light of the Moon that is enveloped, is the Consciousness that

illumines the very Avidya that covers it. As this Avidya/Maya/Ajnana

is the root cause of the entire prapancha, it is quite appropriate to

say 'whatever is the cause or the effect is inert matter'. This

accords well with the Mandukya teaching also: The Turiya is beyond

cause and effect; the cause designated by the prajna (sleep) paada

and the effect being designated by the vishwa (waking) and taijasa

(dream) paadas. Again, as effect, the waking and dream states are

illumined by the Consciousness and this is quite obvious. As cause,

the prajna is also illumined by the Consciousness, later proved by

our waking expression 'I slept happily, I did not know anything'.

This 'not knowing' in sleep is the being conscious of the latent

state during sleep. Thus, Consciousness being never-failing,

illumines the 'cause' and the 'effect', thereby showing that both the

cause and the effect are inert matter, for they do require the

unfailing Conscious entity to illumine them. In the example, Rahu is

the enveloping ignorance (cause, in its latent form) being illumined

by the Moon (the Consciousness different from the illumined

ignorance).

 

Again, ignorance, both as cause and as effect, is subject to

modification and therefore is fit to be termed inert.

 

Finally, the sentence in the Sri Vidyaranya's introduction, 'By the

whole of that inert matter the self-luminous Consciousness is

veiled', informs us that (a) the cause (inert matter) veils the

Consciousness. That is why, in the presence of ajnana persisting,

Consciousness is not apprehended as it is. But in Samadhi/Sakshatkara

where ajnana is absent, there is the apprehension of Consciousness in

its pristine pure form. (b) the effect (inert matter) veils the

Consciousness. That is why in waking and dream, engrossed as one is

with the manifest duality, one is unable to apprehend Consciousness

as it is. Thus inert matter, jada, both as the cause and as the

effect, veils Consciousness, the Chit.

 

(On comparing the translation by Sri Alladi M. Sastry with the

original (Sri Vidyaranya's bhashya to the Taittiriya Aranyaka), I

found that it is not a sentence by sentence translation.) Again, the

above explanation that I have attempted accords well with the

comments on Avidya you have provided, also quoted in the beginning of

this post.

 

Thanks Prof.ji, I found your two posts from the archives truly

interesting. I am sorry for making this post somewhat lengthy; i

could not avoid this.

 

Warm regards,

subbu

[Guest guest]

Namaste Mahadeva,

 

Mahadeva wrote

" I am neither Dvaitin nor Advaitin but my own intuition

leans towards Advaita. I would like to better understand"

At the outset I am very happy to meet another student of Swami Daynanda Sarasvati. I consider very lucky to have been tutored by Pujya Swamiji.

 

Every one begins somewhere and we do haev lot of questions. As Lord Krishna says we begin from where we stopped in the last janma. We pick up the thread in this janma and progress further by the grace of Isvara.

 

Pujya Swamijis Gita Home study is an excellent for understanding many of the concepts. Going through the four books many I found answers to many of my questions. Its simple clear and lucid. These are transcriptions of his classes on Bhagavad gita conducted ovver years. If you do not have this book please try and get them one by one. We study this in groups of 5 or ten people of similar wave length.

 

The satements we say about ourselves ; " I am a dvaitin I am a vishishtAdvaitin I am an advaitin" are all the same as sayinmg I am a house wife, i am a father, I am a doctor, i am a teacher, i am a friend, I am an architect I am a grand father I am intellegent, I am a pundita etc etc.

 

This is due to sthUla sarIra abhimAna. identification with the body.The abhimAna can be on all the pancakosha annamaya abhimana rUpa adhyAsa, prANamaya abhimana rUpa adhyAsa, manomaya abhimana rUpa adhyAsa, vijnAnamaya abhimana rUpa adhyAsa and Anandamaya abhimana rUpa adhyAsa.

 

The identification or abhimAna gets reflected in ones behaviour, mannerism and speaking etc etc.

 

This adhyAsa is due to avidya based misconceptions and erronneous notions.

 

More time spent on the study of shastras will remova all these notions.

 

This is not something wrong because as long as we are living and going into the kitchen to eat this is going to be there.

 

The "I" gives the identity for the human being and the identification with the :I" which is called the ego creates 'N' number of problems of samsAra.

 

Please listen to the talks by Swami Paramarthaji on Mundaka Bhashyam and Bhagavad Gita online for more clarity.

 

www.YogaMalika.org

 

Wishing you all the best

om namo narayanaya

Lakshmi Muthuswamy

 

 

 

 

 

 

Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs.Try it free.