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

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Swamiji,

Thank you for the explanation and reference, sir.

I have not completely understood the reasons for some of your below points
- I did think everything drishta was srishta according to this vAda, and
that the AbhAsa of other jIvAs was because of that.

That is, the seer who is anAdi is not srishtA, but the seen is. It looks
like there are other reasons for other jIvas' AbhAsa in eka jIva vAda.  As
you say, I need to spend some time studying / thinking. Thank you for
bringing this angle up.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan
On 13 May 2016 9:46 a.m., "श्रीमल्ललितालालितः" <
lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com> wrote:

> I don't know what you know about dRRiShTisRRiShTi, but if you think that
> 'everything' is sRRiShTa then you need some more time to look at old books
> and similarly more time to use inference and imagination too.
> Even in ekajIva-dRRiShTisRRiShTi anAdi-s are not sRRiShTa. And jIva is one
> of the anAdi-s. People appreciate if someone presents some old sentence, so
> here it is from advaitasiddhikAra - अनाद्यतिरिक्तसृष्टिविषय एव
> दृष्टिसृष्टिस्वीकारात् ।
> Why ekajIvavAdin-s don't accept jIva and support jIvAbhAsa is totally
> another thing. And, similarly the acceptance of nAnAjIva has nothing to do
> with dRRiShTisRRiShTi or sRRiShTidRRiShTi.
>
>
> *श्रीमल्ललितालालितः*www.lalitaalaalitah.com
>
> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> So definition of srishti in drishti srishti is limited to prapancha but
>> not other jIvAs? This would mean that not everything drishta is srishta.
>>
>> How else to preserve drishti srishti and nAna jIvAs?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Venkatraghavan
>> On 13 May 2016 7:44 a.m., "श्रीमल्ललितालालितः" <
>> lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 13-May-2016 12:10 pm, "Venkatraghavan S" <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > To each jIva, appearance of other jivAs is also part of his srishta
>>> prapanchA? He may not think they are his srishti though.
>>>
>>> if that was the case then what is the use of accepting nAnA jIva? and,
>>> how is it going to be nAnAjIvavAda?
>>>
>>
>