Ishvara and jivanmukta

[Dr. M. Giridhar]

>> Shrikrishna is the same as Shri RamaNa maharshhi. Both are jnAnam in
>> embodied form. Somehow, we do not attribute the properties ofIshwara
>> to Shri RamaNa while we readily call Shrikrishna as Ishwara ! Why is
>> that ?

>I dont think a jIvaNa muktA will equal Ishvara. I do not have any
>reference for this now. I request knowledgeable members to discussthis
>issue. A jIvanamuktA is free while here itself, because he does not
>identify himself with ephemeral things. But he is not Ishvara.Ishvara has
>certain unique powers. Which jIvanamuktAs cannot lay claim upon. If they
>do that very moment they will fall deep down from that state. This is my
>belief. shrIkR^iShNa is a pUrNAvataram. You can not compare him with
>a jIvanamukta. I request Rama and Anand to correct me if I am wrong.

>From the home page,
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/8107/sats.html
--

Advaita does not affirm the aikya at the vyaavahaarika level. After all,
Ishvara is the Lord of the world, the controller of maayaa. How can an
individual soul be the same as Ishvara? It is foolish to think , "God and
I are the same, so I am the Lord of the world and I will do whatever I
please". What is meant by jiiva-Ishvara aikya is that the essential nature
of both is Brahman. It means jiiva and Ishvara with all their upaadhis
(limiting factors) removed are the same.

However, this jiiva-Ishvara aikya also applies to jiiva-jiiva in the
vyavaharika satya. For example, i have certain qualifications and job,
while my friend is illiterate and cannot do my job. Thus, though on a
body-mind level, we are acting different roles (donning different veshas),
we are not different since the essential nature of us is Brahman. So long
as we associate each other with names and forms, and think that the jivas
are different from Atman, we are different. This difference is unreal
since in essence (when the upaadhis are removed) we are all the same.

---

        Having said this, I think it is essential to qualify this remark,
especially in Kali yuga. While we never worship jivanmuktas like
Ashtavakra or Janaka or Bharata by building temples in their honor or
showing aarthi, nowadays all "jivanmuktas" seem to have that.

>Which jIvanamuktAs cannot lay claim upon. If they
>do that very moment they will fall deep down from that state. This is my
>belief.

        Ravi, your previous posting said that Ramakrishna itself
said that he was same as Rama and Krishna (i.e., an incarnation of
Vishnu). Similarly, almost all the present century "jivanmuktas" either
claim themselves to be avatars or are claimed so by their devotees.
Examples are sarada devi, ammachi, Shirdi Sai Baba, Satya Sai Baba,
Shivshankar Baba, Meher Baba, Ramana Maharshi and _many many_ more. As far
as I know, only sarada devi and RM in the above list were not worshipped
ritualistically when they were alive, though the custom is prevalent now.

        Ultimately, I do not think there might be a great error in this,
because the devotee sees Ishvara embodied in these jivanmuktas, and a true
Guru will always lead the disciple to jnana, irrespective of whether the
disciple sees the guru to be incarnation of Ishvara or not.