There is no pramana for atma the knower to know the truth of oneself other than shastra which is an independent pramana.
The meaning of the mahavakya is the pramana.
The mahavakya has to be understand in terms of what it is trying to convey, which is not any experience, given atma is self evident I.
The meaning of mahAvAkya is that I, self evident I, am , the truth of ishvara. Ishvara is the one from whom universe emerged and resolves back unto, and ishvara entered this universe that arose from him, as the sakshi.
I am the truth of this isvara, I am neither a sAkshi, nor is there any universe that arose or is sustained or resolves back unto me. This I cannot experience as a fact, given my truth transcends the experiencer, experienced paradigm, rather it is a shastra revealed fact about myself, wherein experiencer experienced paradigm is mithya, and I am understood to be:
sat chit anantam - self existent and self evident truth of both experiencer and experienced, who am neither experiencer nor exprienced (neti neti), so I ascribe my experiencer status and my experienced status to mithyatvam, that is beginingless mithyatvam
Even if I experience mithyatvam that remains mithya experience and even if I am an experiencer I remain mithya experiencer wherein this mithya experiencer and experinced is sustained by is having me the non experiencer non experienced self evident self existent I as the satyam. I am satyam brahma.
What is about satyam is mithya, since satyam has no attributes. Satyam is attributeless.
So any attribute of I or I is , is mithya attribute.
No comments:
Post a Comment