[Advaita-l] About the term in 'Ishwara' in Advaita - a brief note

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

> Let us take your energy analysis a little further to see if we can save
> Ishwara so that you can say "god save us" if anyone gets confused in spite
> of your Lear writing. Every thing (sun, light, desert etc.) etc. are energy
> only. But in a world made up of different manifestations of energy such as
> the sun, we see instances of pure energy (e.g. energy field). We don't talk
> of energy localised in a field as different to energy that all objects are
> ultimately made of. By the act of localisation, it does not cease to be
> energy.

But we talk of the objects as different from the energy localized in a field
and we talk of the energy density of a field and fluctuations in the field.
 
That is where the analogy stops. Because, by definition, brahman is infinite
and admits of no fluctuations. There is no such thing as density of brahman
in ISvara or jIva and there is no such thing as localization of sarva-vyApaka
brahman. So, I can still say God save us if and when the need arises, no
problem.
 
> 
> Likewise, all this is Brahman on final analysis but this Brahman is able to
> appear within vyavahara as Ishwara without losing His nature as pure
> consciousness or the Self.

Perfectly okay, but what is primary to the nature of ISvara? Is it pure
consciousness or the appearing within vyavahAra? If you agree that it
is the former, then your argument is about a distinction without a
difference. The true nature of ISvara is brahman, but the true nature
of jIva is also brahman. That is all that anybody is really saying. If you
also agree that if not for appearing within vyavahAra, it would not be
necessary to even call brahman as ISvara, then I would remind you 
that advaita insists that the nature of paramArtha does not need
anything from vyavahAra, except to exclude it. It is only in that sense
that ISvara-tva is denied (transcended may be a better way of saying
it in English) in paramArtha.
 
Vidyasankar