[Advaita-l] Eternal Loka

V Subrahmanian v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Sun Aug 11 21:17:23 CDT 2013

On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 9:55 PM, Rajaram Venkataramani <
rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 3:27 AM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
> >wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 9:52 PM, Rajaram Venkataramani <
> > rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >  Where does Appayya Dikshitar say that this Vaikuntha or Vishnu is
> > > non-eternal? If Ishwara is a concept, so are all vyavahara satyams.
> > >
> >
> > This must be in reference to the Brahma sutra of the fourth chapter.
>  4.4.5
> > gives Jaimini's view which appears to be alluded to by Appayya Dikshitar.
> > 4.4.6 gives the view of auDulomi that opposes Jaimini's. In 4.4.7
> > bAdarAyaNa the author of the brahma sutras settles the issue by accepting
> > both Jaimini's and auDulomi's views as admissible from the vyavaharika
> and
> > pAramarthika viewpoints.  Pl. see the shankara bhashyam for this.
> >
> > RV: I am afraid that this is an incorrect inference from the bhashyam.
> From a vyavahara perpective, you do not consider an atma jnani to be one
> with Ishwara as it tantamounts to superimposing on him characterisitcs of
> Ishwara.

This will not happen as the creatorship, etc. of Ishwara are not admitted
for a jnani vide BSB 4.4.17.  In any case, this is with reference to saguNa
brahma upasaka-s who attain Ishwara sAyujyam.  Here Shankara clarifies that
this function, however, is admissible only for the 'nityasiddha Ishwara.'
and not to the mukta jIva-s.  As for BSB 4.4.5 it is the satyakAmatvam,
satyasamkalpatvam and some bhoga-s which the shruti mentions for the jnani,
which are attainable only as one with Ishwara.  This view of Jaimini is
refuted by auDulomi who relies on the chinmAtra svarUpatvam of a jnani and
therefore the impossibility of any bhoga-s which naturally involves
dwaitam.  He holds the shurti passages on bhoga as eulogical reference only
to convey that the jnani is free from misery.  Both these views are
admissible as per bAdarAyaNa from different viewpoints.  In the world
people think a mukta to be one with Ishwara and would grant them what they
pray for, etc.  You can view this post, incidentally on the same headline,


>From a paramartika point of view, you dont have either bondage or
> liberation.

Yes.  That is why auDulomi's view of the chinmAtra nature of the mukta is
upheld as giving the pAramArthika view by bAdarAyaNa and non-contradictory
by Dikshita in the si.le.san.

> >
> RV: In Siddhantalesa Sangraha, Appayya Dikshitar  takes up the question
> whether a mukta attains oneness with Parameshwara or Nirguna Brahman. He
> says that a jiva attains oneness with Ishwara and not Nirguna Brahman. He
> explains that a jIvA is a reflection of Ishwara and is non-different from
> Ishwara because (in pratibimba vAdA) bimba and pratibimba are identical.
> When a jIvA gets liberated, the mirror of ajnAna(sthula and sukshuma
> sarira) pertaining to that jIva is destroyed but the jIvA continues to
> exist as Ishwara. Until all jIvAs get liberated, which will happen after
> infinite time or in other words never, Ishwara will continue to exist as
> their bimba. Therefore no jIvA can attain the ultimate salvation when the
> world is totally dissolved until all jIvas are liberated. Hence the term
> "sarva mukti". The same sthula sarira does not return for any one. The
> sukshuma sarira does not return for a jnani. But even a jnani remains
> forever in the memory, if we can call it that, of the omniscient Ishwara.

This is only the vyAvahArika view as the very existence of Ishwara is
dependent on the world and the world will have to depend on Ishwara for its
sustenance, dharma, etc.  So, this view is non--contradictory to the
Jaimini view.

> I had a follow up discussion with Sri Mani Dravid Sastrigal to confirm the
> understanding.

I am not saying that the above understanding is wrong.  But to hold that
that is the final view of Vedanta/Dikshita would be wrong.  When I first
responded that Dikshita was only alluding to the Jaimini view, I was only
guessing. My guess turned out to be on the right track when I read the
si.le.san. on the above topic along with the commentary: krishnAlankaara,
spending quite a lot of time.  He cites Dikhshita saying in his
'nyArakShAmaNi' that what he said in the si.le.sang. is non-contradictory
to the nirguNa mukti.  The commentator cites the actual passages of
Dikshita in the other book where he says: what we have said in the
si.le.san. that the mukta attains to Ishwara is admissible since the
shuddha chaitanyam forms the common ground for both jiva-s and Ishwara and
as such the mukta identifying himself with that shuddha chaitanyam *can be *
admitted to be experiencing Ishwaratvam, the various fruits of the
upAsaka-s and the overall sarvAtmatvam.  For this Dikshita cites the
vAmadeva-articulation of his realization: 'I was manu, I was sUrya, etc.'

Such a realization only says that 'everything that has been in the past,
everything that is now, and everything that will be in the future is
grounded on the nirguNa Brahman and that brahman am I.'  Such a realization
is not contradictory to the nirguNa brahman realization of Advaita.
Dikshita's and Jaimini's view, that is conditional alone, is ONLY with a
view to give validity to the shruti 'the mukta will enjoy bhoga-s with
women, eating, etc.' in the Chandogya.  There, in the upanishad, Shankara
has commented that 'the mukta, AS Indra, etc. will enjoy these bhoga-s'.
So, whatever experience whoever has in whatever loka due to whatever karma
CAN be said to be the nirguNa Brahman's bhoga since in Advaita the entire
creation, past, present and future is superimposition on Brahman OR a
projection of Brahman, just like a dreamer projects his own dream and
experiences everything there as he is what everyone he has projected and
every object that is projected there.

And since the jnani realizes himself to be none other than that Brahman,
there is nothing wrong in holding that he is one with ishwara who is the
one that has become the world.

The commentator concludes saying that 'just as in Jaimini's view, Dikshita
too admits the bhoga-s, as Ishwara, for the jnani.

This is only a notional view.  Since there is no sthula and sUkshma sharira
for the Jnani, as per the shruti, there can be no real bhoga for the
jnani.  All bhogas of everyone in creation CAN be wished to be that of the
jnani, just as all bhogas of everyone* may be *thought to be that of
nirguna brahman *because* it is the basis for all superimposition.

Anyone who studies the concluding part of the si.le.san. along with the
extremely painstakingly written commentary will appreciate the above
explanations.  The ultimate conclusion arising from the above discussion
is: the Jnani becomes one with nirguNa brahman - this is the parama
siddhanta of Advaita.  The avAntara (gauNa) siddhanta is that the jnani
remains AS Ishwara and everyone else.  Both these are admissible as
non-contradictory, to give credence to various shruti passages based on
different view points: vyAvahArika or pAramArthika.  The vyavaharika is the
one that admits of creation, Ishwara, jivas, bandha and moksha.  The
paramarthika is the one that negates all creation and therefore no bandha
and moksha.



More information about the Advaita-l mailing list