[Advaita-l] Shankara and DrishTi-SrishTi vAda - eka jeeva vaada

[H S Chandramouli]

>
> Sri Anand Ji and Sri Venkatraghavan Ji,
>
>
>
>  It is clear from Sidhantaleshasamgraha that there are several versions of
> DSV covering different aspects like number and nature of Jivas, nature of
> creation (real or unrea letc )and different combinations of such basic
> features. I will confine myself to one version only namely the one
> postulated by Sri PrakAshAnanda in Sidhantamuktavali and use the shortform
> PDSV for brevity.
>
>
>
>  It is also clear that in both PDSV and the Bhashya (Sri Bhagavatpada)
>  pAramArthika status is identical. The issue would then be the status of
> creation for which there are three options namely satya, mithya or
> asat(tuccha). In my understanding mithya has been chosen for this in the
> Bhashya while asat(tucccha) has been chosen in PDSV. Elaborate and
> comprehensive reasons have been advanced in the Bhashya for rejecting the
> other two options. Elaborate reasons have been advanced in PDSV also in
> support of its stand. This being of fundamental significance, it is in my
> view an unbridgeable difference between the two and hence PDSV cannot be
> considered as just a prakriya bheda within the ambit of the Sidhanta
> advanced by Sri Bhagavatpada.It needs to be recognized as an entirely
> different prakriya.
>
>
>
>  Also It is quite reasonable to admit that certain specific ideas and
> arguments might have been adopted in PDSV from previously available works
> of authors like Vimuktatman or Vidyaranya ( even though their theories
> could be  different ) in support of specific ideas in its own  postulate.
> It is the same with other authors also. However it is too farfetched , in
> my view , to consider such instances as evidence of their ( previous
> authors ) endorsement or inclination in favour of its (PDSV)  own postulate
> itself. It is inconceivable, in my understanding , that persons like
> Vimuktatman or Swami Vidyaranya who are so totally committed to the Bhashya
> could endorse  the PDSV which, on fundamental issues of great significance,
> is quite contradictory to the Bhashya.
>
>
>
> With this I wish to conclude, on my part , the discussion. Afterall all
> good things have to come to an end. It has been a very useful, interesting
> and informative discussion from which I have learnt a lot. Thanks a lot for
> the same.
>
>
>
> Pranams and Regards
>