Queries from VA thread

[atanu]

Jiva is a Brahman is true to the extent it is an attribute of the Brahman, but Brahman=jiva equation is false, like calling a fruit as a mango.

Certain things are impenetrable, Some intellects are such.

Which Advaitin has used an equation Brahman =Jiva? You are spreading mis-information.

Jiva is a modification of Pragnya only and nothing else. Yes, you may call these as attributes, which are not beings at all. Thus "I am a Jiva" itself is false, since it is Self only who says I.

[satay]

With incorrect understanding of attributes, Advaita says that Exsitance=Knowledge=Bliss= Brahman each by itself.

I am not an advaitan but even I know that this equation is wrong!

where are you getting your information about advaita!

[Sudarshan]

Oh is it so? Most Vaishnavas try to prove in so many unpalatable way that Mahesvara -- the Param Parastad is a mere jiva. Shankara has no such agenda. Is any proof required? Many hymns to Shiva are the proofs. And funnily, you take what suits and condemn what does not. If Shankara was such a proof for you then why you are derisive for his teachings? For your purpose you try to make Shankara the authority for this point alone rubbishing his main teaching that Vishnu is Shiva and Shiva is Vishnu -- The Self.

Hymns are no proofs. Show it from philosophical texts. even Madhva Vaishnavas have composed many hymns on Shiva so that does not prove anything. Even Vedanta Desika composed a hymn praising Shiva and in some compositions he praises Garuda like "one whose brilliance is equal to Vishnu". But these are not proofs and the teachings must be traced to the prastAna grantAs only.

You do not understand the point. Shankara is respected for his scholarship and his devotion towards Vishnu and all his views in the regards can be accepted by Srivaishnavas. Madhva Vaishnavas will not agree with me here.

But in his mission for absorbing Buddhism into vedanta and thus eat up Buddhism, he used Buddhist technology into vedanta and thus his version of vedanta is only a form of Buddhism. All philoosphers after Shankara have accepted this fact as jaganmitya and the classification of realities into three are not vedantic concepts but that of Buddhism. If you read advaita and Buddhism together, the parallel witl be obvious. Of course, you cannot find this because you know neither Advaita nor Buddhism, except some version of neo advaita. You expect others to accept all these? Naw!

[Sudarshan]

Certain things are impenetrable, Some intellects are such.

Which Advaitin has used an equation Brahman =Jiva? You are spreading mis-information.

Are you saying that Jiva is not Brahman? Then what is it , explain please? This is a good move towards finding the truth.

Jiva is a modification of Pragnya only and nothing else. Yes, you may call these as attributes, which are not beings at all. Thus "I am a Jiva" itself is false, since it is Self only who says I.

So Jiva is a moficiation of Prajna Prajna itself is ultimately unreal, and hence so is jiva. Then who is under ignorance? Oh, I forgot - ignorance is also unreal. I got it - the illusory jiva is under the spell of an illuosry ignorance. Gotcha!!

[Sudarshan]

I am not an advaitan but even I know that this equation is wrong!

where are you getting your information about advaita!

Advaita wants to say that, but cant say that openly because people like you will catch it easily . So it resorts to negatives by clipping the Brahman off all his attributes.

[satay]

I know Atanu will explain it nicely but I have read that jiva is soul under illusion or in maya. pure conciousness is brahman/shiva which is all pervading but when in bodage it is called jiva

But I better stop right here...I can't sustain any points as I do not know the advaita philosophy.

[Sudarshan]

I know Atanu will explain it nicely but I have read that jiva is soul under illusion or in maya. pure conciousness is brahman/shiva which is all pervading but when in bodage it is called jiva

But I better stop right here...I can't sustain any points as I do not know the advaita philosophy.

This is the rough summary of Advaita:

brahma satyam jagan mithya jivo brahmaiva napara

Brahman is Reality, the universe is an illusion, The Jiva is Brahman alone, none else.

[satay]

This is the rough summary of Advaita:

brahma satyam jagan mithya jivo brahmaiva napara

Brahman is Reality, the universe is an illusion, The Jiva is Brahman alone, none else.

In my limited understanding 'jagat' is mithya doesn't mean that it does not exist physically!

The jagat is there but is always changing and thus is not real reality...

I mean this keyboard that I am typing on is real and exists physically but is not 'real' reality.

the only unchanging 'thing' is pure conciousness and so that is the real 'reality' or truth.

[ramkish42]

This is the rough summary of Advaita:

brahma satyam jagan mithya jivo brahmaiva napara

Brahman is Reality, the universe is an illusion, The Jiva is Brahman alone, none else.

As the statement occurs in this thread, I had mentioned vaishnavite view on Brahmam satya jagat mitya in some other thread
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...5&postcount=95

[ramkish42]

In my limited understanding 'jagat' is mithya doesn't mean that it does not exist physically!

The jagat is there but is always changing and thus is not real reality...

I mean this keyboard that I am typing on is real and exists physically but is not 'real' reality.

the only unchanging 'thing' is pure conciousness and so that is the real 'reality' or truth.

This unchanging thing alone is real is again a fallacy.

To put it

1. We identify brahman as unchanging, hence real.
2. The event "Change" does not change, "Change" always exits, hence change should also be real.
3. As change is real, anything that changes most probably should be real.

Irrespective of the third premise, first two premise invalidate the claim of Advaitin that only one thing exists

This is not to contradict Advaiti philosophy but towards the idea that Unchanging alone is real idea.

When the scripture is studied deeply, we come to know, maya is brahman, it changes and it exits always. If maya is not real, then as per the statement maya is brahman invalidates the claim brahman is real.

Truth is somewhere inbetween, I am