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

[H S Chandramouli]

Thanks for the correction. I stand corrected.

Regards


On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 4:48 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 4:45 PM, H S Chandramouli
> <hschandramouli at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > The author of Ishta sidhi should read as Vijnanatman and not Viditatma.
> >
>
> It is VimuktAtman.
>
>
> vs
>
> > Regret the error.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 4:06 PM, H S Chandramouli
> > <hschandramouli at gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > > Namaste.
> > >
> > > This is regarding Iswara and Brahman. The answer to this issue given by
> > > Bhagavatpada forms the core of advaita sidhanta, namely the maya vada.
> > This
> > > is the red rag for practically all those opposed to advaita including
> > > western philosophers. Ofcourse those in India as well. This has been
> the
> > > subject of extensive studies/discussions/deliberations etc of expert
> > > thinkers/practitioners/darshanakaras/and so on for centuries now. It is
> > not
> > > as simple as swarupa/tatastha lakshanas. Sri Vidyaranya Swamiji has
> > > deliberated on this briefly in his Panchadashi. But perhaps the most
> > > authoritative and elaborate exposition is by Viditatman in his Ishta
> > Sidhi
> > > ( One of the four Sidhi works on Advaita, the other three being Brahma
> > > Sidhi, Naishkarmya Sidhi  and Advaita Sidhi ). If one is so keenly
> > > interested he should refer to this work. There may not be much point in
> > > trying to discuss this issue in its entirety here in this forum.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > >
> > > 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??!!
> > >> 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!!.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 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.
> > >> 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.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 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 !!
> > >> 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.
> > >>
> > >> >  We shall discuss this in detail with sUtra and itareya bhAshya.
> > >>
> > >> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> > >> bhaskar
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> 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
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>