A
One of the biggest flaws in the understanding of mithyaatvam of advaitavada by these folks is they think anithyatvam (impermanence) is the hetu (reasoning) to say jagath doesn't exist. That is not a correct understanding of what is being revealed by vedanta and advaitic interpretation. Advaitic interpretation of vedanta says time, space and objects - all are "dependent realities". Time itself needs to be illuminated by consciousness of living entities for its existence. Same goes with space and any object. Na tathra suryaha bhaathi.... even sun doesn't self-illuminate, unless illuminated by a conscious entity. Dependence of inert world on consciousness for its existence is the fundamental fact that cannot be refuted. Now comes the question of whether 'dependent realities' are sathyam. Advaita says just as a pot as a dependent reality on clay or a snake as dependent reality on rope, dont have a sathyatvam but only an appearance, while the clay and rope are (relatively) sathyam. How can dvaita philosophy refute this? This person says since I experience the world it must exist. Hey, you experience a pot as well as clay (in a clay pot). Do both exist as independent realities? Can you ever see the pot (clay pot) separate from clay? If not, how can you say it exist? Though you experience a pot, it doesnt actually exist as an independent reality. So, your logic that world exists as a complete independent reality because you experience it is a totally flawed. There are many things in the world that you experience but dont have independent reality.
A
In the state of ignorance, everything is separate, just like whatever is seen in the dream state does not exist on waking up. Similarly, on becoming aware, one's separate existence does not remain, it remains only an illusion, it does not remain in the form of a name, just like if one looks down from a plane, a lot is visible, but when one goes up, not much is visible, hence, when these two dreams come out, whatever remains in the end is the truth, how can we deny our experience, we also do not remain there, on waking up with knowledge, none of this remains, just like the world of dream state does not exist on waking up, neither does one wake up nor whatever is there in the dream at that time. For some the truth is false but on awakening one comes to know that it was not in reality, on awakening with that very knowledge nothing remains, the office becomes round, so which truth should the awakened people believe to be true, then there is no point in fighting, until someone does not reach this experience, then it seems to him to be the truth, in reality there is only one, all the other things that are in me, they are ours, they did not remain in the state of knowledge, so those who knew this truth, how should they believe it, which in the end they saw saved, then only that one should be considered as truth? Truth is that which was always there, and is still there
A
No comments:
Post a Comment