[Advaita-l] Re: Advaita-l Digest, Vol 2, Issue 21

[Jay Nelamangala]

>
> Then what about that which is sa-vikAra in any or all of these kAraNas?
Not
> parabrahman? Then, your siddhAnta is no longer that parabrahman is
jagadeka
> kAraNa.

Parabrahman is aprAkrita. All other kAraNas are prAkrtic as well,  and
therefore
they are all sa-vikAra just as prakrti itself is.

Parabrahman is aprAkrita jagadEka-kAraNa, so our siddhAnta still holds.

>Or is parabrahman simultaneously saviKAra and nirvikAra? Also, when
> you say, "nirvikAra in it", do you mean to say parabrahman is a part of
> something else? If so, what is "para" about it?

No,  shruti says "nirvikArah shuddha satvaha".  Parabrahman is only
NirvikAra.
Some darshana thinkers had postulated that  Brahman as material  cause,
some others as efficient cause,  and yet some others as both.
While examining all these differnet thoughts,  AchArya Madhwa says
"that which is nirvikAra in what you are saying,   that is Brahman to me".
"nivikAra in it"  must be understood only in this context.

This is how Madhwa-siddhAnta goes :

Parabrahman is in everything,  but He does not go through the different
"avasthA" that the thing goes through.  Everything is made out of prakrti.
That prakrti is the one which undergoes change.

Shrutis say "sarvavyApee sarvabhootAntarAtmaa sarvabhootAdhivAsaha"

Sri VedavyAsa expresses this idea in Geetha as :
 "matsthani sarva bhootAni  na cha aham tEshu  avasthitaha"  - 9.4

Parabrahman is "antaryAmin" in the prAkrtic things, yet He remains
untouched by the changes that prakrtic things undergo,
because He is in all only as sAkshii.
Upanishats describe Him as  "nirvikArah shuddha satvaha"  and
"sAkshee chEtaa"  for this reason.

This is the background for the above answers.