[Advaita-l] Re: Gods - finite or infinite

[ramesh badisa]

“The next few sutras examine the implications of an infinite jiva”

“saMkalpAdeva tu tacchrute.h || 8 ||”

“But through will only, according to Shruti"

“According to i.e. Chandogyopanishad 8.2.1, the liberated soul can get all he desires such as the pitraloka through his will only”  

“But for the one who identifies with saguna Brahman, he already exists in all places. So it is only necessary for him to focus his attention on that one part of his being localized to a certain place”

Badisa: Earlier, the discussion on this topic was to know if the liberated souls at BL or gyani amongst devatas are all pervasive or not. It seems that based on the above sutra you are trying to prove the all pervasiveness or infinite nature of liberated souls. Based on Ch. Up 8.2.1, the above Brahma Sutra (BS) implies that just by mere ‘will’ the fathers in pitriloka come to him. Come to whom? Come to the liberated soul. Right? Where is this liberated soul located currently? In the Brahma Lok (BL). Right? It means that BL is a different place and pitri loka is another different place. Then only, traveling from pitriloka to liberated soul in BL is possible. Visiting of someone from pitriloka itself is a very clear indication that the liberated soul is not present at pitriloka. If the liberated soul is present in pitriloka at the same time as that in BL to indicate or prove its all pervasive nature, then in that case, there is no need for the above sruti text to declare for visiting
 of someone from pitriloka to liberated soul. Visiting is possible between two finite points.  So, the above Brahma sutra or sruti text does not indicate the all pervasive nature or infinite nature of the liberated soul at BL. Rather these references proves clearly the finite location of liberated soul at BL. 

“ata eva chAnanyAdhipati.h || 9 ||”

"and for this reason he is without another lord"

Badisa: Again, to whom this sutra is referring to? To the liberated soul at BL. Even after having self realization, the liberated soul at BL has not yet become divine. How do we know that? BS 4.4.17 (Jagad……)clearly says the lack of certain lordly powers, like creation etc for the liberated soul at BL. If the liberated soul at BL is considered to be divine in absolute sense, then how come it is deprived of certain powers? Divine is all powerful, and cannot have limitations. But the sutra 4.4.17 says some limitations for liberated soul at BL to indicate that it is not divine. On the other hand, when the sutra (4.4.9) says that the liberated soul at BL is without another lord, it needs to be understood in a secondary sense only - not in primary sense. The secondary sense is that after self realization, the liberated soul at BL now realized its divine nature with experience. Before realization, it was thinking that divine is something present out side of it, and thus worshipped divine
 in saguna form. This erroneous feeling is removed upon by self-realization. Now, having realized his divine nature, the liberated soul now ‘knows’ that “He” is “Him” and “He” will be divine in absolute sense soon (at pralaya), and then “He” will be without another lord. But before realization, the liberated soul was thinking that divine was present out side of it and thus considered to be lord for him. But this feeling was lost after realization. When the sutra declares that the liberated soul at BL is without another lord, it does not mean that this soul has become divine soon after realization in absolute sense. If it is taken in absolute sense, then the question why this soul still has some limitations for certain lordly powers (creation etc) needs to be explained. Also, it should be explained why the Lord Brahma and the liberated souls at BL should attain higher level (atah param – BS 4.3.10) than the one at BL level at pralaya (BS 4.3.10). Attainment of higher level is possible
 from a lower level. An entity, which is at the highest level (salvation), cannot attain another highest level (salvation). But, when the sutra says for attainment of the highest level (salvation) for the liberated soul and Lord Brahma at pralaya, this is clear to show that the level (BL or any other abodes), where liberated soul or the gods exist, is not the highest level. In that case, they cannot be all pervasive or infinite. They can go anywhere, but it does not mean that they are all pervasive. So, the conclusion is that the BS you have quoted above does not support the idea that the liberated soul at BL is all pervasive or infinite. I would like to give another proof for my argument. If the liberated soul is all pervasive and infinite, then it is not possible for it to move from one place to another, as it is present every where. But, the soul, which followed the 8/24 path of Gita, or as quoted earlier in Ch. Up or Br. Up or Kaushita up. etc, (Dev yan marg), passes various
 lokas. How is this movement on the part of soul possible if it is all pervasive or infinite? The movement of this soul through various lokas clearly proves beyond any doubt that the soul is not all pervasive or infinite. You are also applying the same all pervasiveness and infinite nature for all gods, including lord Brahma. This is incorrect. If Lord Brahma is all pervasive, then how is it possible for amanav purush to reach the soul at Vidhyut lok (BS 4.3.6) and then accompany and guide this soul to Brahma Lok (Br. Up. 6.2.15)? If Lord Brahma is all pervasive, then how is it possible for amanav purush to guide the soul to BL? If this soul is all pervasive or infinite, then how is it possible to reach BL with the help of amanav purush? How is this movement possible if this soul is present everywhere at all the times? But, when the movement is happening as per sruti, it means that they are not all pervasive and not infinite. Another proof I would like to quote in this regard comes
 from Gita, 9/20-21, where Lord Krishna clearly indicates the movement of soul after the death of physical body to another place called heaven and their return to samsar later. Similarly, Lord Krishna at 9/25, clearly mentions the movement of soul after the death of physical body to various lokas and their return. This consistent to what Lord Krishna says at 8/16 in Gita. Lord Krishna also says in 9/25 that who so ever attains him will never born in samsar. All these references clearly show the finite location of soul.               

“If we take the definition of God to be an omnipotent, omniescent being, then it follows there is only room in the universe for one God.  Thus it is not enough to say a liberated soul is "like God." He is existent in all points of all dimensions of the universe so he _is_ God” 

Badisa: Yes. Divine is omnipotent and omniescent. But the liberated soul at BL is not omnipotent due to lack of certain lordly powers, like creation etc as per BS 4.4.17. Lack of omnipotent nature on the part of liberated soul at BL cannot make it to be called divine in absolute sense. Now, as per the above definition of god, since the liberated soul at BL is not omnipotent, it cannot be omniescent. It means that the liberated soul at BL or gods cannot be all pervasive or infinite. See, your own above answer has the answer to prove the finite nature of liberated soul at BL. How can you claim that the liberated soul at BL or gyani amongst devatas being omnipotent and omniescent? It is simply not possible please. 

“The next adhikarana of the Brahmasutras deals with whether the liberated beings need to be embodied or not………. Like awakefullness” 

 

Badisa: Previously, you also agreed that gods do have certain form of body. Similarly, the liberated soul at BL will have a subtle body, mind etc. Now, the BS 4.4.10-14 talk about the necessity for requirement of body for the liberated soul at BL to fulfill its wishes by mere will. Bhagawan Baadari says either way can fulfill the wishes of liberated soul at BL. These sutras do not say or indicate the all pervasive nature or infinite nature of liberated souls at BL. Rather, Bhagawan Baadhari says that liberated soul at BL can enjoy with or without a body. Here, lack of body cannot be viewed that the liberated soul is all pervasive. This soul still has the mind, which is prakruti as per Gita, 7/4,&13/7. Even though, this soul, with or without a body, multiplies in to many forms based on BS 4.4.15, then again, all these multiple forms have minds – means prakruti. Existence of prakruti on the part of liberated soul at BL is another way to show that these souls are not divine in absolute
 sense, and thus cannot be all pervasive and infinite, and this is the reason the liberated soul has no certain lordly powers (BS 4.4.17). So, whatever the BS you have quoted above, they do not prove your point. Rather, they all are talking about the same liberated soul, before pralaya, which is devoid of lordly powers of creations etc. This proves that this soul is not all pervasive or infinite like divine. The same explanation is applicable even to gyani amongst devatas, including the Lord Yama. Therefore, the conclusion is that the liberated soul at BL and gods are not all pervasive and that they are localized finitely.       

 

“ So based on all this, we can say that Bhagavan Yama did not have to 

teach Nachiketa because of penance for the sin of disrespecting a guest.  The body of an average person is subject to the effects of merit and sin. But the muktas take on form their own purposes such as in order to teach one …” 

 

Badisa: I do not know the reason under what context the above answer is given. Our earlier question was to know if the liberated soul at BL or gods, including Lord Yama, is all pervasive or not. Our discussion revolved around this topic, and as per my above answers, based on scriptures, it is clear, at least for me, that the liberated soul at BL or gyni amongst the devatas, including Lord Yama, is not all pervasive and not infinite. They will be all pervasive and infinite only at pralaya, not before. At the time of pralaya, the mind etc will merge in prakruti (being prakruti) and liberated soul or qualified soul merges in divine and will never take birth in samsar. 

 

Please note that I am not disrespecting gods or goddess in any manner. I have respect for all. 

Namaste.  


		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
 Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.