[Advaita-l] ChidAbhAsa and Ishvara

[Raghav Kumar]

thank you for the unfoldment Subramanian ji
you have written -
" For example, in the Taittiriya Upanishad 'Ananda mImAmsA' portion,
prajApati's Ananda is termed as only relative.  That means there is an
antaHkaraNa or some such upAdhi which reflects the upahita Ananda to that
extent.  We should note that his knowledge is not questioned here but only
the reflecting medium he possesses is stated/posited.  In this way we can
say that even for Ishwara there is the मायोपाधिः (as contrasted with the
अन्तःकरणोपाधिः of the jiva) where the vishuddhA chit gets reflected.  It is
certainly not a paricchinnopAdhiH for Ishwara who is well regarded as
sarvajna, sarveshvaraH.  Yet it is an upAdhi in the sense that such a
sarvajnatv/sarveshvaratva is dependent upon/relative to the 'sarva'
consisting of all the jiva-s and the jagat.  In turIya, even this sarva is
absent. And that is why for moksha this jnanam is required."

True. PrajApati in Ananda mImAmsa can be inferred to have an antahkaraNa, It
can be argued that he is the first cosmic evolute to possess an antaHkaraNa.
Prior to him, there was no other being who had an antaHkarana. So this
prajApati has cidAbhAsa similar to the way any jIva has cidAbhAsa. Yet ,*this
prajApati is but an exalted jIva who keeps changing in every kalpa. **Now,
surely we also have the other still higher idea of Ishvara who is the
source of all Prajapatis in all kalpas, and Ishwara who was never a jIva in
any kalpa*. This Ishwara who is Saguna Brahman, a constant in all kalpas,
does not have or even NEED any antaHkaraNa. Maya is his upAdhi. But to talk
of cidAbhAsa for Ishwara may be quite unnecessary if the word cidAbhasa
is understood in the sense given below

I would like to suggest that the whole idea of cidAbhasa was introuduced in
the tradition primarily to explain not how the jIva is *different *from cit,
being a limited/partial manifestion of that very Cit. Rather, the more
important reason is to explain how the jIvopAdhi is able to accomplish
something like free will, deliberation, thinkng etc which are not possible
for stones and rocks etc.

Rocks and stones too have the aspects of "asti and bhAti", or "sattA and
sphurti" which are derived from their adhiShThAna which is Cit-Brahma alone.
In that wider sense, everything in jagat, even inanimate matter has
cidAbhAsa. But that is not the idea behind introducing this word by the
acharyas of yore. Rather, the antahkaraNa (the reflecting meduim, as you put
it) is a special configuration (sattva-pradhAna configuration) of the
panchabhUtas which endows it with a special property or characteristic not
observed in stones etc., and this allows the antaHkaraNa to catch the
reflection so to speak of the all-pervading Cit  I have cidAbhasa, but an
android or robot which can mimic "seeing" or "perception" through CCD
cameras and software does not have cidAbhasa. Therefore, even if we
grudgingly grant a robot/android some kind of vritti-vyApti when it "sees"
an object. It does not have phala-vyApti which I have, which comes from
cidAbhAsa of my antaHkaraNa.  Therfore I have perceptual knowledge which I
can own up (I know that I know) and objectify, while the robot has at best
perceptual information but not knowledge or ownership over that its data.)

If cidAbhAsa is taken in the above sense (which the Upadesha-sAhasri,
panchadashi etc unfold), then prajApati has cidAbhAsa as
taittiriya-ananda-mimamsa explains, but Ishwara/Saguna Brahman who is the
cause/source *of all the prajApatis in all kalpas*, who is the wielder
of mAyA-shakti does not NEED an antaHkaraNa and a cidAbhAsa for
manifesting prajApati at the commencement of srishthi in a particular kalpa.
So the word/idea of cidAbhAsa should be restricted to the jIvopadhi, be it
an exalted jIvopAdhi (PrajApati) or a "regular" jivopAdhi.


Raghav

On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 12:22 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>wrote:

> Sriram ji,
>
> Your explanation, based on the vAsudeva mananam, is no doubt fine and the
> shabda-vyutpatti for चिदाभासः is also undoubtedly correct.  However, that
> word offers other possibilities too:
>
> The आभासः reflection of चित् Consciousness (चिदः आभासः प्रतिबिम्बः
> चिदाभासः). With this vyutpatti we can, without flaw, say that the samaShThi
> shareeraabhimAni has/is chidAbhAsaH.  The Apte dictionary gives this as one
> of the meanings for the word आभासः - A reflection: 'तत्र अज्ञानं धिया
> नश्येत् आभासात्तु घटः स्फुरेत् ('vedantasAraH').  (Here I think the
> prakriyaa for the perception arising from seeing a pot is discussed. )
>
> For example, in the Taittiriya Upanishad 'Ananda mImAmsA' portion,
> prajApati's Ananda is termed as only relative.  That means there is an
> antaHkaraNa or some such upAdhi which reflects the upahita Ananda to that
> extent.  We should note that his knowledge is not questioned here but only
> the reflecting medium he possesses is stated/posited.  In this way we can
> say that even for Ishwara there is the मायोपाधिः (as contrasted with the
> अन्तःकरणोपाधिः of the jiva) where the vishuddhA chit gets reflected.  It is
> certainly not a paricchinnopAdhiH for Ishwara who is well regarded as
> sarvajna, sarveshvaraH.  Yet it is an upAdhi in the sense that such a
> sarvajnatv/sarveshvaratva is dependent upon/relative to the 'sarva'
> consisting of all the jiva-s and the jagat.  In turIya, even this sarva is
> absent. And that is why for moksha this jnanam is required.
>
> Says the shukarahasyopaniShat:
>
> कार्योपाधिरयं जीवः कारणोपाधिरीश्वरः The jiva is the one endowed with the
> kAryopaadhi that is the body-mind complex and Ishwara is the one endowed
> with the kAraNopaadhi that is mAyA.
>
> Regards,
> subrahmanian.v
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Venkata sriram P
> <venkatasriramp at yahoo.in>wrote:
>
> > Namaste,
> >
> > //
> > cidAbhAsaH is relevant at the samashTi level or not.
> >
> > /
> >
> > Shri Vasudevananda Saraswati denies the chidAbhAsa tattva at samasShTi
> > level.
> >
> > chidAbhAsa lakShaNa leads to adhyAsa-tAdAtmya & chit-jaDa granthi which
> is
> > the avidyA lakShaNa of Jiva.
> >
> > Moroever, as discussed earlier, AbhAsa means "IShat bhAsamana lakShaNa"
> > ie., the luminosity of Chit gets "diminished" which leads to "kinchit"
> > lakShaNa in Jiva.
> >
> > At samaShTi level, there is no "kinchit" lakShaNa.
> >
> > regs,
> > sriram
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>