[Advaita-l] 'world' is not the mental creation of tiny soul !!

[H S Chandramouli]

Dear Sri Venkateshmurthy,

I would like to clarify that I have not offered my views as part of any
debate or discussion on Sri SSS's views. I have just offered my views as I
am comfortable with them. I may also add that I refer to the works of Sri
SSS very often as they are in kannada which I prefer for vedantic issues
and also because I just happen to own quite a few of them. They have been
of great help to me in understanding advaita whether I am entirely
comfortable with them or not. I have not come to a level where I need to
make such a definite choice for further understanding of the subject.

Regards


On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Venkatesh Murthy <vmurthy36 at gmail.com>wrote:

> Namaste
>
> After reading these discussions on SSS and Avidyaa we can draw this
> conclusion. SSS camp must accept Jeeva is the Owner of Avidyaa. Jeeva is
> the Creator. OR they have to accept Moola Avidyaa  and Brahman is the Owner
> of Moola Avidyaa to become Creator. But SSS has written very lengthy works
> to reject Moola Avidyaa. The first conclusion is the only one left.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:54 PM, H S Chandramouli
> <hschandramouli at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Dear Sri Bhaskarji,
> >
> > You will pardon me if many of the arguments advanced herein are of a very
> > elementary nature and need not have been elaborated upon. But for the
> sake
> > of clarity of my views I have included the same. Kindly bear with me.
> >
> > P ::
> >
> > << The shruti  says << tadhetam tarhi avyakrutamaaseet >> . Here
> avyakrita
> > includes both atma and anatma. anatma in seed form. It is only proper to
> > consider that avidya is " resident " in brahman/atman. This does not in
> > any
> > way lead to advaita hani
> >
> > >  Yes, it does not do any advaita hAni, but dont you think this would
> > lead to conclude that before srushti, brahman was endowed with 'anishta'
> > like avidyA and brahman was giving the ashraya to the anishta hetu
> > avidyA?? >>
> >
> > H ::
> >
> > It has to be conceded that the entire sequence of events from brahman to
> > creation/sustenance/dissolution including cannot be argued out purely on
> > the basis of reasoning/logic. Only a possible direction for the analysis
> > could be the limit of reasoning. For assertion about the finality of the
> > conclusion Shruti is the only authority.  Only the interpretation of the
> > Shruti is left to us. Even here the interpretation and analysis by
> > themselves cannot lead upto the final realization. Only direct
> experience (
> > aparoksha jnana ) leads to absolute finality in this regard. Due to this
> a
> > certain level of nonunderstanding of the position must necessarily be
> > admitted till aparoksha jnana arises. When the Shruti states as in the
> > above vakya that avyakruta does indeed exist in seed form prior to
> > creation, and at the same time it maitains that brahman is
> > nirguna/nirvikari etc It has to be accepted that nature of "residence" of
> > ayakruta is anirvachaniya and of a lower level of reality. This change in
> > status of avyakruta itself means that its characteristics cannot affect
> in
> > any way the nature of brahman. Also it may be emphasized here that "
> avidya
> > " is the power " Maya " and not " anishta " which includes all the three
> > gunas corresponding to the three shaktis jnana/icha/kriya . There is
> > absolutely no doubt that this interpretation has to be based on Sri
> > Bhagavatpada Bhashya  which has been elaborated upon by by many jnanis
> > themselves including Sri Vidyaranya Swami.
> >
> > P ::
> >
> > <<
> > because avyakruta is not of the same level of reality.
> >
> > > In the context of creation, shankara says whatever is their in
> avyAkruta
> > rUpa is brahman's shakti only or brahman only and vyAkruta rUpa (kArya)
> is
> > nothing different from that shakti and in turn this shakti is nothing but
> > brahman only. >>
> >
> > H ::
> >
> > Yes. But this shakti is also declared as " anirvachaniya " . Hence
> anything
> > coming out of this shakti enjoys the same level of reality , that is
> > anirvachaniya or mithya.
> >
> > P ::
> >
> > <<
> >
> > It can also vanish when we consider nirguna brahman who is then
> > without even this seed avidya. That is also the reason why it is called
> > anirvachaniya, it has to be inferred by the karya only ( of Creation etc
> > ).
> >
> > >  kArya is nothing but kAraNa's vishesha rUpa clarifies shankara in
> sUtra
> > bhAshya.  And he continues to say that there is no difference between
> > kArya & kAraNa since kArya cannot exist on its own apart from kAraNa.
> > Shankara here gives 'devadatta' example, who is the same person when he
> > stretched his arms & legs and when he  folds his limbs some other time.
> >>
> >
> > H ::
> >
> > Same as above.
> >
> > P ::
> >
> > << In the same way nirguna brahman is the same with or without his maya
> > power. There is no change in It becuse maya is vivarta in nirguna
> brahman.
> > Devadatta's example does not in any way vitiate this position. There is
> > really no change in the " person " devadatta when the postures are
> > changed.>>
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > praNAms Sri ChandramouLi prabhuji
> > > Hare Krishna
> > >
> > > The shruti  says << tadhetam tarhi avyakrutamaaseet >> . Here avyakrita
> > > includes both atma and anatma. anatma in seed form. It is only proper
> to
> > > consider that avidya is " resident " in brahman/atman. This does not in
> > > any
> > > way lead to advaita hani
> > >
> > > >  Yes, it does not do any advaita hAni, but dont you think this would
> > > lead to conclude that before srushti, brahman was endowed with
> 'anishta'
> > > like avidyA and brahman was giving the ashraya to the anishta hetu
> > > avidyA??
> > >
> > >
> > > because avyakruta is not of the same level of reality.
> > >
> > > > In the context of creation, shankara says whatever is their in
> > avyAkruta
> > > rUpa is brahman's shakti only or brahman only and vyAkruta rUpa (kArya)
> > is
> > > nothing different from that shakti and in turn this shakti is nothing
> but
> > > brahman only.
> > >
> > > It can also vanish when we consider nirguna brahman who is then
> > > without even this seed avidya. That is also the reason why it is called
> > > anirvachaniya, it has to be inferred by the karya only ( of Creation
> etc
> > > ).
> > >
> > > >  kArya is nothing but kAraNa's vishesha rUpa clarifies shankara in
> > sUtra
> > > bhAshya.  And he continues to say that there is no difference between
> > > kArya & kAraNa since kArya cannot exist on its own apart from kAraNa.
> > > Shankara here gives 'devadatta' example, who is the same person when he
> > > stretched his arms & legs and when he  folds his limbs some other time.
> > >
> > > I am really surprised at the various posts in this thread as well as in
> > > another thread that jiva also could be considered as cause for creation
> > by
> > > adducing the reason that he is none other than brahman << jivo
> brahmaiva
> > > na
> > > parah >>.
> > >
> > > >  Yes, it is really perplexing to see this vijnAna-vAda like theory
> from
> > > the banner of advaita tradition.  jeeva cannot be a srushti karta and
> > this
> > > portfolio has been assigned forever to brahman only without any
> variation
> > > when it comes to the event and context of creation.
> > >
> > > 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards
>
> -Venkatesh
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>