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

[V Subrahmanian]

Thank you Sri Sada ji, for your various posts in this discussion with me.
 I can understand that those who are not exposed to the traditional study
of the Vedanta are not familiar of the eka jiva construct which is by
default the method of the prasthanatraya bhashya-s.  Let's  agree to
disagree on this matter.

warm regards
subbu


On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:01 AM, kuntimaddi sadananda <
kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Subbuji - PraNAms
>
> With due respects, I still feel one has to be careful in interpreting the
> pourusheya slokas if it appears to contradict the statements of srithi.
> jnaamadyasya yathaH defining Brahman (Iswara) using the taTastha lakshna
> cannot not be applied to local tiny BMI identified jiiva where the BMI is
> part of that creation. If you say Jiiva in reality is nothing but Brahman,
> then we are talking about from the point of jnaani. If jiiva thinks that is
> the local tiny BMI which is essentially jiiva-hood, he cannot be the
> creation of the cosmos. We cannot have both ways here. Either accept that
> jiiva that is being mentioned as the creator of the entire cosmos  is not
> from the local BMI point but from Iswara point. Apply the same thing to the
> dream world. The dream world is not the projection of the mind of the
> subject in the dream who is running away from the chasing tiger in the
> dense forest, but the total mind that pervades the whole creation, the tiny
> jiivas BMI,
>  his notions, the tiger, the forest and any other chara achara in that
> world. The tiny subject in the dream cannot create the tiger and the run
> away from it.
>
>
> vyaavahaarika satyam has to differ from the praatibhaasika in that not
> only cognition but transaction is involved - such as running away from the
> tiger or shooting it either in the waking world or in the dream world.
>
>
> Cognition does not involve creation and then cognizing that creation by
> the local mind. Mind perceives what is there that which is beyond its
> creation. Even in praatibhaasika when the local mind is projecting as in
> the case of snake on a rope, the snake comes from the memory of the object
> perceived in the past or assembled in the mind using the perceived objects
> such as hare with horns etc. The assembled parts are again not the creation
> of the tiny jiiva in the praatibhaasika.
>
>
> I would interpret the mental creation mentioned in the sloka not to the
> objective world outside but formation of the vRittis in the mind which
> becomes knowledge of the subject, chidaabhaasa. Here the local mind is only
> creating the vRitti of the object for volition and cognition and what
> Krishna says is what ever you cognize using the mind is mithyaa which as I
> mentioned Shankara says - dRisyatvaat - in this commentary on Madukya
> kaarika.
>
>
>  I am unable to accept your interpretation that the cosmic creation is by
> the local mind therefore it is mithyaa. I would say it is by the global
> mind and is taken as real by ajnaani's mind until he recognizes that it is
> neither sat nor asat,, thus becoming jnaani.
>
>
> Only when using that mind when  a jnaani understands that I am not this
> tiny mind but I am the substratum for the entire universe, then one can say
> that identified Brahman is the creation of the entire universe in tune with
> the scriptural statements.
>
>
> I would say you are extending the rope/snake example beyond the range of
> applicability. Shankara uses the example to indicate the adhyaaas aspect.
> There are two types of adhyaasa - sOpaadika and nirupaadika that I know you
> are familiar. Rope/snake which is praatibhaasika error and mirage waters or
> appearing red crystal, or modern example of sunrise and sunset etc or more
> vyaavahaarik adhyaasa - both come under mithyaa, dRisyatvaat.  Shankara is
> not endorsing cosmic creation by the local tiny jiiva's mind. Jnaani and
> ajnaani see the Iswara sRishTi - the difference as you know the one sees as
> mithyaa while other thinks it is satyam. Hence contextual interpretation
> has to be done in tune with whole vedantic teaching.
>
>
> Since we are not going anywhere, I will stop with this unless I am wrong
> in saying that it is not the global mind that creates the cosmas  in tune
> with Krishnas' many statements in Geeta - prabhavaH pralaya sthaanam..
> gatir bhartha prabhuH saakshii, mayaa tatam idam sarvam jagat .. etc. as
> you are very familiar. Laya and pralaya  and mahaa pralaya are distinctly
> different one from micro and the other from macro. aabrahma lOkaaH... etc
> are all part of macro and cannot be created by tiny jiiva and then entering
> into those. Creating and then cognizing by the local mind comes from my
> understanding close to vijnaana vaada than Vedanta.
>
>
> Sorry I am unable to accept your interpretation that tiny jiiva's mind is
> creates the whole cosmos and then cognizes it and therefore whatever
> cognized by that mind is mithyaa. What ever cognized is mithyaa as
> dRisyatvaat  is true but that need not involve creation by the local jiiva.
>
> He only creates more confusion on top of Iswara creation which we call it
> as jiiva srushti.
>
> Since I have nothing more to add, I stop here.
>
> Hari Om!
> Sada
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 3/27/14, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] 'world' is not the mental creation of tiny soul
> !!
>  To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>  Date: Thursday, March 27, 2014, 3:28 AM
>
>  On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:12 AM,
>  kuntimaddi sadananda <
>  kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>
>  wrote:
>
>  > ---------------------------------
>  >
>  > Subbuji - PraNAms
>  >
>  >
>  > What I have mentioned is local mind cannot create and
>  then cognize and
>  > then say that it is illusion. That is not Vedanta.
>  Global mind, yes- which
>  > we call Iswara.
>  >
>  >
>  > The above sloka you quoted is in tune with my
>  statement.
>
>
>  Dear Sri Sada ji,
>
>
>  The bhAgavatam verse is not about any global mind called
>  Hiranyagarbha.  It
>  is about the individual's mind who is being addressed in
>  those verses.  The
>  verse is an upadesha for Uddhava, an individual and not
>  Hiranyagarbha.  To
>  him the Lord says: whatever is comprehended by the
>  instrumentality of the
>  mind, senses, etc. is mAyAmanomayam, an imagination,
>  reverie.  The Lord is
>  not talking of Hiranyagarbha/Ishwara's creation for they do
>  not use the
>  mind, senses, etc. for apprehending the world.  Also,
>  it would be
>  irrelevant to Uddhava to talk of Ishwara's creation and
>  asking him to see
>  it as mAyAmanomayam.  Uddhava cannot correct Ishwara's
>  projection.
>
>
>
>  > Hence- sa kaale satyavat bhaati PRABHODE satyasat
>  bhavet - says Shankara -
>  > applicable to both dream creation and creation in the
>  waking world. The key
>  > word is prabhode - All the slokas that you quoted can
>  be correctly
>  > interpreted from the perspective of jnaani than ajnaani
>  where one shifts to
>  > aatama-anaatma reference.
>  >
>
>  What the Jnani realizes is the path, practice, for the
>  ajnani.  Also, in
>  the manIshA panchakam verse, the Jnani says: all this is
>  imagined by me
>  through avidyA.  Where is avidyA for Jnani?
>
>  >
>  > As you  know the Advaita makaranda sloka you
>  mentioned -... jagat gandharva
>  > pattanam -comes as the third sloka - after establishing
>  that aham
>  > brahmaasmi in the first two slokas and even in that
>  sloka it says -
>  > sarvajnam sarvakaaraNam - that does not pertain to the
>  local mind.
>  >
>
>  The shloka is addressed to the ajnani for contemplation,
>  practice.  He is
>  not to be tied down to the local mind; he has to expand,
>  elevate himself to
>  the higher prakriyA of eka jIva construct and view all
>  others, others'
>  minds, etc. as the projection of his own mind.
>
>  >
>  > My point is one has to obviously interpret smRiti
>  slokas in consistent
>  > with Vedanta.  I am sure you agree with that. The
>  point is only to come up
>  > what is the correct interpretation that is in tune with
>  Vedanta.
>  >
>
>  In fact the question does not arise at all, as I pointed out
>  that Shankara
>  Himself is commenting on the shruti-creation bahu syAm
>  prajAyeya as
>  'rope-snake like projection, an imagination of the
>  mind.'  It is already in
>  tune with the bhAgavatam /advaitamakaranada/manishApanchakam
>  etc.  verses.
>   So, if the charge of wrongly interpreting the bhAgavatam
>  smRti verse is
>  raised, it is first applicable to Shankara.
>
>  >
>  > This is my understanding : As long as one is in the
>  triad format -
>  > jiiva-jagat-Iswara- which involves I am a jiiva notion
>  with the local BMI
>  > as I am, the creation is not by that local mind and
>  after creating perceive
>  > with the mind that it has mind created  all the
>  attributive world that it
>  > perceives using again its senses and then cognize it as
>  if it is there
>  > outside that local BMI.
>  >
>
>  Actually, the adhyAsa bhashya itself is the ground for the
>  eka-jIva vAda
>  construct.  There itself we have the avidyA-base for
>  the pramAtru, his
>  mind, sense organs, reactions, etc.
>
>  >
>  > Even for praatibhaasika one uses the attributive
>  content of the snake or
>  > ghost from the memory that is projected on the object.
>  atasmin tat buddhiH
>  >  involves (a) the object that is there that mind
>  did not create, (b) the
>  > projection of attributes of another object from the
>  memory based on (c) the
>  > prior perception of the object that the mind did not
>  create before.
>  >
>
>  All these questions are answered by Advaitins.  There
>  is anAdi adhyAsa and
>  the question of any prior knowledge of the object
>  superimposed is not there
>  to be addressed.  It is enough if the object is
>  unreal.
>
>  >
>  > I must say that so far my understanding has not been
>  negated - that the
>  > creation is not by the local mind but by the global
>  mind, where local mind
>  > only cognizes as well as transacts with what is created
>  by the global mind.
>  > This transactions can continue even after jaanam. As I
>  mentioned, local
>  > mind can create on top of what is created by global
>  mind due to its raaga
>  > dweshaas which we call as jiiva shRiShTi in contrast to
>  Iswara shRiShTi as
>  > vidyaranaya discusses in 4th Chapter of Pancadashi.
>  Jiiva sRiShTi is the
>  > cause for samsaara and not Iswara sRiShTi. The
>  difference is very important
>  > from jnaanam point, which I know that you know.
>  >
>
>  Actually in that very chapter, soon after the above
>  referenced verses,
>  Vidyaranya wants the aspirant to take steps to eradicate the
>  'entire'
>  dvaitam.  pl. ref. to verses 38 onwards of that
>  chapter.  He says: the
>  jIva-created dvaitam can be subdued during dhyAna/samAdh but
>  that will not
>  put an end to his re-birth cycles.  For that he has to
>  know that the entire
>  dvaitam (not just jIva-created) has to be known to be
>  mithyA.
>
>
>  warm regards
>  subbu
>
>  >
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > 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
>