01-27-2005, 06:50 AM
AKji,
I did say unreal for jagat. I thought that i was wearing a advaitic hat and was questioning the example that Gangajalji gave. Isn't Jagat unreal from an advaitic standpoint?
When i said reality in 'beyond reality', i was talking about the reality which is beyond mind and the intellect can grasp. If the arguements are within the logical boundaries, . is not nirguna brahman beyond mind and intellect. If logic itself is limited to mind and intellect how do we account for nirguna brahman without Chida sudhi(which is beyind mind and intellect?).
PS: I am not taking sides here. Just trying to understand what the philosophy says and where i stand.
From my apology of a knowledge, my position is advaita is the ultimate reality and Vishitadvaita is valid *within* the reality that a human mind and intellect can comprehend. Since, we won't talk about reality-unreality when we transcend maya and when we are within it, i take Vadvaita as valid as long as i am within maya.
I did say unreal for jagat. I thought that i was wearing a advaitic hat and was questioning the example that Gangajalji gave. Isn't Jagat unreal from an advaitic standpoint?
When i said reality in 'beyond reality', i was talking about the reality which is beyond mind and the intellect can grasp. If the arguements are within the logical boundaries, . is not nirguna brahman beyond mind and intellect. If logic itself is limited to mind and intellect how do we account for nirguna brahman without Chida sudhi(which is beyind mind and intellect?).
PS: I am not taking sides here. Just trying to understand what the philosophy says and where i stand.
From my apology of a knowledge, my position is advaita is the ultimate reality and Vishitadvaita is valid *within* the reality that a human mind and intellect can comprehend. Since, we won't talk about reality-unreality when we transcend maya and when we are within it, i take Vadvaita as valid as long as i am within maya.