2.1.18 During dream, the mind projects a dream world out of latent tendencies in it formed out experiences in the waking state. There are 72000 nAdis (like blood vessels) emanating from the heart through which prAna shakti travels to different parts of the body. The sense organs are not functional as they are resolved in the nAdis. The jIva (the reflected consciousness in the mind) travels through the nAdis and experiences the dream world projected out of the latent tendencies in the mind. In the dream, what are the ‘achievements’ of the jIva. He is, as it were, a king or a noble brAhmana or an animal. There are states of high and low. The achievements are false. It is to be noted that the jIva remains in the nAdis and does not reach the heart. If it reaches the heart, then it is the state of sleep.
Surefire Way To Liberation – Part 1
Surefire Way To Liberation:
- Non-stop Direct:
One attains (eternal and irreversible) identification with brahman by being established in brahman *even in the closing years of one’s life* — 2.72, BG.
Essential Requirements:
a) Should be free from all desires, be free from hankering, without the idea of (‘me’ and) ‘mine’, and be devoid of pride — 2.71, BG.
Shankara comments at 2.71, BG: Only that man attains peace (Liberation) into whom all desires enter, from all directions, like waters entering into a sea, without overwhelming him.
World disappearing and mithyā
Not a lot of discussion on the site recently. I thought maybe the time was ripe for a little controversy again. Recently I queried ChatGPT for Shankara references on this topic. I also encountered just a few days ago, a devastatingly logical argument against this idea, but I will save that for a later post. Here is the (single post) AI contribution. Of course, you may argue, AI is presenting its position so as to support my own view – a recognized problem with AI at present). Perhaps, then, Ramesam or Venkat could tackle AI with essentially the same query to elicit a response in keeping with their belief? That would be interesting!
Q: Where does Shankara define what he means by the word मिथ्या and what does he say?
A (ChatGPT): Adi Shankaracharya, the great Advaita Vedanta philosopher, defines the concept of mithyā in several of his works, particularly in his commentaries on key Vedantic texts. The term “mithyā” generally refers to the idea of falsity or illusoriness. It’s crucial in Advaita Vedanta because it relates to the nature of the phenomenal world and how it is perceived in relation to the ultimate reality, Brahman.
One of the most explicit definitions of mithyā is found in Shankaracharya’s commentary on the Brahma Sutra (Brahmasutra Bhashya) in the section known as the Adhyasa Bhashya. Here, he describes mithyā as something that is neither completely real (like Brahman) nor completely unreal (like the horns of a hare), but rather something that appears real under certain conditions but is revealed as unreal upon closer examination or when true knowledge is attained.
Continue readingChAndogya Upanishad (Chapters 6 to 8) Part 6(2)
ShankarAchArya answers the question: Who is Svetaketu, denoted by the word ‘thou’?
“It is he knows himself as, ‘I am Svetaketu, the son of Uddalaka’, and who after hearing the instruction, thinking over it and understanding it, asked his father for knowing what has not been heard of and thought of, and remains unknown, ‘Venerable sir, how is that instruction imparted?’ He who has become entitled to be the hearer, the thinker, and the knower, is none other than the supreme Deity himself, who, in the form of reflection has entered into the aggregate of body and organ made up of fire, water, and food, like a person in the mirror or like sun, etc., in water etc, for the sake of manifesting name and form.”
Duality is mithyA
Up Sah 19.20 to 19.22 have been inter-alia discussed here. It requires fine tuning. Hence this post. Upadesha SahAsri 19.20 discusses the status of duality. It has neither birth nor absence of birth. Both have contradictions as explained below. Thus, duality is neither existent nor non-existent. It is neither real nor unreal. In VedAntic terminology, it is mithyA.
1 Suppose there is birth of duality, i.e., there is a cause of its birth. It may be an existent cause or a non-existent cause. A non-existent cause is a non-starter and cannot give rise to an effect. An existent cause can be either (a) non-duality or (b) duality.
(a) The cause cannot be non-duality, because the nature of non-duality is changelessness.
(b) If there is birth of duality A from duality B, then there is a question of birth of duality B and so on. It leads to infinite regress which is logically unacceptable.
Waking Vs Dream
We treat the waking state as real and dream state as unreal. ‘Day dreaming’ is used when a person imagines in the waking state. GaudpadAcharya in his karikA on MAndukya Upanishad refutes the ‘unreality’ of dream and shows that the two states are on equal footing.
I Utility
Objection: Dream objects have no utility in waking state.
Refutation: To a dreamer, dream water is useful, not the water in waking state.
II Reality
Objection: Dream objects are unreal because they may not exist in the waking state.
Refutation: Even though dream objects may not be seen in the waking state, yet they are as real to a dreamer as objects in the waking state are to the waking person.
Use of the word ‘mithyā (Part 2)
*** Read Part 1 ***
The key conclusion made in the discussion below was that, according to AI search: “I have not seen a single place in the prasthāna-traya bhāṣyas where Śaṅkara uses mithyā to label the world or jagat in that ontological sense.”
Q: Vani Vilas will be fine. Your suggested presentation sounds good!
A (ChatGPT5): Excellent—I’ll proceed using the Vani Vilas (1910) Sanskrit editions, and I’ll present three strong, verifiable examples where Śaṅkara himself uses a mithyā- compound in the clear metaphysical sense you described. For each example, I’ll provide:
- A scan of the original page from the Vani Vilas PDFs with the term highlighted, complete with the file identifier and precise page number.
- The exact Devanāgarī text (including the mithyā- compound and ± one line of context), transcribed verbatim.
- My own literal, word-for-word English translation and a brief explanation of how the context conveys the “illusory but Brahman-dependent” sense.
- Full bibliographic citation: volume number (per Works of Śaṅkara 1910), PDF or DJVU page number, and Internet Archive identifier.
BrihadAranyaka Upanishad (Part 4)
Chapter 2 Section 1
2.1.1 to 2.1.14 It is a dialogue between GArgya, a BrAhmana and a kshatriya king AjAtshatru of KAsi. GArgya has learnt VedAs and he knows Saguna Brahman. AjAtshatru is a jnAni. GArgya visits AjAtshatru and offers him to teach Brahman. AjAtshatru understands that Gargya’ s main intention is to get dakshinA, i.e., teacher’s fee for teaching. He gives him 1000 cows for his proposal to teach. Though GArgya’s knowledge is confined to Saguna Brahman, he thinks that he knows everything and is proud. He says that he meditates on aspects of Saguna Brahman, namely, sun, moon, lightening, space, air, fire, water, looking glass, sound of breath of walking man, directions, shadow. and asks the king to meditate on these aspects.
ChAndogya Upanishad (Chapters 6 to 8) Part 6(1)
6.13.1 to 6.13.3 and 6.14.1 to 6.14.3 Uddalaka continues the teaching using common metaphors as he finds that Svetaketu is a worthy student. When salt is dissolved in water, it is not possible to see the salt with eyes. However, presence of salt is ascertained by tasting the water from top or middle or bottom. Brahman is present in every jiva but sense organs are unable to perceive it. However, there are other means, namely, the scriptures, by which Brahman is known as the Self of jiva. A robber having brought a person blindfolded from Gandhara leaves him in a desolate place. The person is clueless about directions and in particular about the direction leading to GandhAra. He cries for help and fortunately on getting guidance from someone, he proceeds towards GandhAra inquiring for its location from people whom he meets on way. Finally, he reaches GandhAra. Similarly, as long as a person does not get a preceptor, he remains ignorant about Brahman and Self. If he is fortunate due to his punyas earned, he gets a preceptor and he becomes liberated. Sections 13 and 14 conclude with Thou that art.
Use of the word ‘mithyā’ in traditional Advaita
Back in 2013, I posted a short essay on the topic of ‘Origin and Meaning of the word mithyA‘. In this, I stated that the word only occurs in one instance in Prasthāna Traya and Shankara’s commentaries, namely in the Muktika Upaniṣad. This statement has recently been challenged, so I undertook to investigate further. I enlisted the assistance of ChatGPT, since I was interested to see whether the latest version (5) was an improvement upon the earlier version. It is – very much so! Here is the ‘conversation’, posted in two parts.
Q: Can you locate any explicit use of the term ‘mithyā’ in prasthāna traya or Śaṅkara bhāṣya?
A (ChatGPT5): Short answer: Not obviously — at least not often.
Continue reading