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

[Anand Hudli]

>If anyone is able to find a reason for why drishti srishti vAda, as
>outlined in siddhAnta muktAvali, and talked about in other granthAs
(fromajn
>what I could make out, Appayya DIkshitar, MadhusUdana Sarasvati, Nishchala
>Das etc. have a similar definition of DSV as PrakAshAnada) consider anya
>jIvas as AbhAsa, I would be most grateful if you can share it here.


If you read the objection raised and its reply on pages 21 and 22 in the
VSM with English translation, you will see that PrakAshAnanda has given a
brilliant answer. As far as I understand, the assumption of "perceiving
other jIvas" (in waking or dream, since both are non-different) is itself
questionable. In fact, he first admonishes the objector: "nUnaM
dehAtmavAdamAshritya bhrAnto asi", you are deluded into thinking the body
and Atma are the same. PrakAshAnanda asks, "svapne anye jIvAH kalpitAH iti
ko arthaH?" What do you mean by saying other jIvas are imagined in a dream?
Does it mean 1) you perceive bodies of devas, gandharvas, (humans,
animals,) etc. or 2) you perceive multiple jIvas as we have defined a jIva,
Brahman limited by ajnAna? (kiM dehA devagandharvAdisaMjnakA kalpitAH? uta
ajnAnopAdhiko yo jIvo asmadabhimataH tAdRshA eva bahavo anubhUtAH teShAm
ekaH satyo anye kalpitA iti?) If the former is the case, then we do not
have any contradiction with our siddhAnta because we do accept multiple
bodies can be perceived by the draShTA, the perceiver, who is the only
single jIva. And it is this draShTA who will be the adhikArin for shravaNa,
manana, etc. in order to get liberated, not bodies or something limited by
bodies. The latter cannot be the case, since you do not perceive multiple
instances of "(consciousness) being limited by ajnAna", which is how we
have defined a jIva. It is not possible for anyone to directly perceive
the ajnAna (ignorance) or knowledge of another.

The gist of the argument is: once you have accepted that there is only one
jIva, considering "other jIvas" as AbhAsa does not arise, since "other
jIvas" is an undefinable term.

Anand