[Advaita-l] Iswara swaruupam - 3

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

> Instead of starting a Nirishwara Advaita school of thought directly contradicting Sankara, it is better to join Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris. At least they are based on science. 
> 

Who is starting a nir-ISvara school of advaita here? Please read Sankara carefully 
before jumping to conclusions as to who is contradicting him. Bringing in Richard
Dawkins and science here is a strawman argument that does not behoove you.
 
If your peeve is that in the paramArtha perspective we deny ALL multiplicity and
we say that in that state, ISvara cannot even be truly called ISvara, as there is no
jagat for ISvara to be an ISvara over, then take your peeve to yAjnavalkya, and
to gauDapAda and to Sankara! Where there is a kingdom, there can be a king, but
where there is no kingdom, who is king? yatra vA asya sarvam AtmaivAbhUt, tat
kena kaM jighret, tat kena kaM paSyet?
 
He who is ISvara, nitya-Suddha-buddha-mukta, even from the perspective of the
jagat, is brahman alone. And he who is jIva, baddha and subject to saMsAra,
from the perspective of the jagat, is also truly nitya-Suddha-buddha-mukta and
is brahman alone. To say this and to write out the logical explication of this basic
principle of advaita vedAnta does not make anyone a nir-ISvara-vAdin.
 
If you do not understand properly what is being said about paramArtha and what
is being said with respect to vyavahAra, then no discussion on advaita vedAnta is
possible. So, for the time being, focus on what is meant by parA prakRti = jIva 
and wait for the ISvara-tva of ISvara, consisting in the prakRti-dvayavat-tva, to
clarify itself to you later. By the same token, focus also on why prAjna, the jIva in
the sushupta state, is described as sarveSvara, sarvajna and sarvAntaryAmI in
the mANDUkya upanishat. 
 
Vidyasankar