This world and our characters are not mere illusion as both are impermanent, hence hence "mithya" (in Hindi) doesn't mean "illusion" or "dream" in English. What is your take?

 Taking something that is impermanent to be ultimately real is an illusion. If something is ‘ultimately real’ then it’s always real so can’t be impermanent. It can be real in a relative sense, but not in the ultimate sense.

Seeing something that is temporary doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist and is just an illusion with no substance. Seeing something as disconnected from Krishna is where the illusion is. It’s in the conception not in the object.

This is explained by Sri Krishna to Lord Brahma in one of the chatur sloki verses of Srimad Bhagavatam.

O Brahma, whatever appears to be of any value, if it is without relation to Me, has no reality. Know it as My illusory energy, that reflection which appears to be in darkness.

PURPORT

In the previous verse it has already been concluded that in any stage of the cosmic manifestation—its appearance, its sustenance, its growth, its interactions of different energies, its deterioration and its disappearance—all has its basic relation with the existence of the Personality of Godhead. And as such, whenever there is forgetfulness of this prime relation with the Lord, and whenever things are accepted as real without being related to the Lord, that conception is called a product of the illusory energy of the Lord.

Because nothing can exist without the Lord, it should be known that the illusory energy is also an energy of the Lord. The right conclusion of dovetailing everything in relationship with the Lord is called yoga-maya, or the energy of union, and the wrong conception of detaching a thing from its relationship with the Lord is called the Lord's daivi maya, or maha-maya. Both the mayas also have connections with the Lord because nothing can exist without being related to Him. As such, the wrong conception of detaching relationships from the Lord is not false but illusory.

Misconceiving one thing for another thing is called illusion. For example, accepting a rope as a snake is illusion, but the rope is not false. The rope, as it exists in front of the illusioned person, is not at all false, but accepting it as a snake is illusory. Therefore, this material manifestation is not false, but the wrong conception of accepting the material manifestation as being divorced from the energy of the Lord is illusion.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What does Lord Krishna says about death in the Bhagavad Gita?

Lord Krishna says death both exists and doesn’t exist. Bhagavad Gita straddles the two worlds of the absolute and the relative. Krishna speaks transcendent truths but applies them in the temporal, mundane world. This is the role of a guru. He must reveal what is beyond sense perception but through the medium of sense perception. He must explain what reality is, using what is not reality. Krishna says that for the soul there is neither birth nor death. (BG. 2.20) Obviously, for matter, there is no death because it’s not alive. So the soul doesn’t die, and matter doesn’t die, and there are only these two energies in the material world (BG 7.4–5), so what is death?
Read more

Action in Inaction and Inaction in Action as per Bhagavad Gita

Under the laws of karma, every action carries a reaction. Only by having zero personal attachments and desires can one avoid reactions Theoretically, if we don’t perform any action there won’t be any reaction which is what we want right? But it’s not possible to live in this world and not perform any activity. People may sit silently in meditation trying to control and empty the mind, but this is still activity. They must eat something, breath, move around a little, so even though they may appear to be inactive, there are still reactions being chalked up, so they are not ‘inactive’ because reactions are accumulating. So actually they are performing actions even though aiming for inaction. This is the meaning of seeing action in inaction. Another person may be active, but their consciousness is completely devoid of any personal desires or interest in their activity so there will be no reaction. It’s as if they were inactive.
Read more

Difference between Shrimad Bhagavatam and Bhagavad Gita

Bhagavad Gita is mainly philosophical. It was spoken by Krishna Himself and is the conclusion of all the Upanisadas. In this unparalleled dialogue between Krishna and Arjuna everything that is important in life is mentioned. In itself it is complete but it is very concise and Krishna deals with one point after another without elaborating. It serves to orient a person so that they know who they are and what they should be doing. While Bhagavad Gita is only 700 verses, Srimad Bhagavatam is 18,000 verses, but the conclusion is the same. The difference between Bhagavatam and Bhagavad Gita is in the detail. For example, in Bhagavad Gita Krishna says: This material nature, which is one of My energies, is working under My direction, O son of Kunti, producing all moving and nonmoving beings. Under its rule this manifestation is created and annihilated again and again. Bg 9.10
Read more

What is human fallibility and redemption as per Bhagavad Gita?

A human is a spirit soul in a human body. The spirit soul or jivatma is always pure, but due to its tiny size it can fall into illusion and think it is its body. In its embodied state the jivatma is fallible. Once we are under the illusion that we are our ‘human’ body, we are restricted by the limitations of the body. We have imperfect senses, we make mistakes, we fall into deeper illusion, and we cheat. These are the basic failings of humans and the result of them is that we make errors. The theological concept of redemption is to be forgiven and freed from the consequences of these errors. It’s more commonly used in Abrahamic religions. In Christianity I believe Christ is understood to be the redeemer of all mankind by his death. Judaism and Islam don’t agree with that understanding but the core principle of being forgiven and freed from bondage is still present and dependent on the Lord’s mercy. The understanding in Sanatan Dharma is that the Lord can forgive and free the living ent...
Read more