[Advaita-l] Omniscience, etc. only due to upAdhi

[V Subrahmanian]

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
>
> >  its year end for me at office, bit busy with bread earning job:-))..so
> kindly bear with me for this curt reply.
>
> Actually only with  sarvajnatvaM, sarvashaktitvaM etc. Brahman (nirguNa.
> Turiya) is called Ishwara (saguNa, sixth mantra of mAnDUkya - ESha
> sarvajnaH...antaryAmi...).  That is the way Advaita distinguishes Brahman
> from Ishwara.
>
> >  but Ishwara is NOT different from brahman and if we are ready to accept
> Ishwara is sarvajna, I am not able to understand why not brahman?? Does
> parabrahman is inferior to Ishwara since he is lacking these qualities??!!
>


Whether we like it or not, the mAnDUkya places Turiya (seventh mantra
nAntaH prajnam..prapanchopashamam..) 'above' Ishwara (sixth mantra:
sarveshwara, sarvajna, antaryAmi...).  Pl. read the bhAShya there.



> OTOH, I would say,  brahman's potence (shakti) which is inherent like
> existence and jnAnaM will be active through upAdhi in srushti kriya.
> Hence, we call the parabrahman itself as sOpAdhika brahman or saguNa
> brahman to denote chetanatva behind srushti.  If we argue parabrahman is
> minus sarvashaktitvaM and sarvajnatvaM we are restricting the parabrahma
> tattva and implying that parabrahman would get sarvashaktitvaM and
> sarvajnatvaM from jadOpAdhi then become Ishwara!!.
>

It is exactly this Shankara has stated in the IkShatyadhikaraNa:  without
that shakti Brahman can do nothing.  Therefore this shakti is admitted as
subordinate.  Satyam Jnanam anantam Anandam are not subordinates; they are
the very svarUpa of brahman.

>
>
> While attributing sarvajnatvaM, sarvashaktitvaM etc. to Brahman we see
> these as taTasthalakShaNa and not svarUpalakShaNa.  'Inherent' means
> svarUpa.
>
> >  Yes, brahman's svarUpa is omnipotence, omniscience no matter whether
> 'omni' is there or not !!  And this inherent shaktitva will be displayed
> through upAdhi in srushtikriya (creation) and karma phala distribution
> etc. ekO devaH sarva bhUteshu gUdAH...kevalO nirhuNascha
> ....shvetAshvatara. Just like consciousness is the nature (svarUpa /
> svabhAva) of brahman shakti, knowledge etc. are the nature of brahman.
>


The first casualty of the above thinking is the teaching of 'tat tvam asi,
aham brahmAsmi' etc.  The jIva can never identify itself with omniscience,
etc.  This is the basis for bhAga-tyAga lakShaNA in understanding the
mahAvAkyas.



> jnAna, shakti, Ishitavya etc. are the nature (inherent) of para brahman
> and parabrahman's these inherent nature is not borrowed one from upAdhi
> when he becomes Ishwara (sOpAdhika).  To distinguish the difference
> between shakti and shaktimAn, jnAna and jnAnavAn etc, the upAdhi-s have
> been introduced and it does not anyway mean after getting upAdhi
> brahman/Ishwara  would get the power  of sarvajnatvaM and sarvashaktitvaM.
>

Ishwara is anAdi.  So omniscience, etc. are upAdhis that exist in Ishwara.
Without these upAdhis is the nature of Turiya.

>
>
> It is essentially with a view to explain the 'everything' the shakti is
> admitted.  'No shakti, no creation.'
>
> >  Yes, no shakti means no creation but it does not mean no creation then
> brahman would remain minus shakti. To be precise, creation depends on
> Ishwara shakti but  Ishwara shakti would not vanish if creation is not
> there since shakti, jnAna, chetanatvaM etc. are inherent to brahman !!
>


If there is no creation, there won't be Ishwara Himself!!



> Hence, IMO, shakti, jnAna, consciounsness etc. are svarUpa lakshaNa ( not
> tatastha lakshaNa which is temporary)  of parabrahman which would get
> projected through upAdhi in srushti and with upAdhi (sOpAdhika) the same
> parabrahman is called saguNa, sOpAdhika, kArya brahma.
>

Yes. It is the same rope that appears as snake.  Only that, while getting
to know the rope one would not insist that snakehood is also inherent in
rope.

>
> >  We shall discuss this in detail with sUtra and itareya bhAshya.
>

Pl. provide those passages from shruti and bhashya which admit omniscience,
etc. as svarUpalakShaNa of Brahman.

regards
vs

>
>