[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: Ishvara-authored Srishti avidyākrta - Says Si

[kuntimaddi sadananda]

Sukaji - PraNAms
---------------------
Sukaji wrote:
2. The second point I would like discuss is whether the world is regarded as objective reality or subjective reality. Śruti uses clay-pot, gold-ornament, and nail-cutter and iron examples to explain sṛṣṭi. It does not use rajju-sarpa example. Śaṅkara uses rope-snake example because it is easier to explain certain aspects of Advaita through that example - such as jñānāt kaivalyam. In the brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya and other places, Śaṅkara explains continuation of the body for a jñāni is equal to the momentum of an arrow shot from a bow - this is the position of śrūti also as in Chān Up 6.14.2 - tasya tāvadeva ciram". Unlike a rope-jñāni for whom the snake disappears for good, we do not see the world disappearing for a brahma-jñāni, though both are adhyastha. The world continues for a brahma-jñāni, like the pot continues despite the knowledge its truth as clay. So, my assimilation of the reality of the world, as per śrūti and Śaṅkara, is similar to clay-pot and not rope-snake, in others words, world is objective reality and not subjective reality. Such a position reconciles with so many things - the fact that a jñāni is the best among bhaktas, and that he remains in action though he has nothing to achieve, and that avidyā is the cause of samsāra etc. 

Bottom line - tātparya of śruti in discussing sṛṣṭi, and the tātparya of clay-pot, rope-snake and such examples are all to only point to the substratum; by extending them beyond this intended purpose, we are committing the mistake of converting a prakriyā, a teaching model, into a system. This should be avoided. 

hariḥ om 

Śuka
-------------------

Sukaji - You have zeroed in on the problem. Beautiful. 

Eka jeeva vaada has to be understood not from the local jeeva. Local mind does not create and then perceive. 
That forms Vijnana vaada.

All the explanations provided are selective only. If you look again Mundaka Up - Frist Chapter First section - where the Up. talks about the Iswara - where the best definition of Iswara is provided -  Mantras 7-9 provides the creation - with Iswara as sarvajna and sarva vit - the first referring to para vidya and the second referring to apara vidya; and the creator has to be sarvajna with 14 lokas and jeevas in those. - There is, of course, upavishata - or entering. Does He enter one jeeva or all jeevas. Entering has been explained forming -  as though - chidaabhaasa(s). Even though there is one Brahman (infiniteness), the reflection can occur where ever there is a reflecting medium (media). 

Jeeva - notion arises at individual chidaabhaasa level -where one identifies with the local upaadhi as I am = this.  

Hence in principle - Eka jeeva vaada or even aneka jeeva vaada - both have no meaning. From the point of one who is identifying himself as I am = this, he also knows that he only - this - this, BMI -he does not have ownership of all BMIs and the world - as he is ajnaani.  From his reference even though - he is the only subject and all others are objects of perception we still cannot call this as eka jeeva,  since even from his reference he feels aneka jeevas only due to his ajnaana; since he has confusion that - He is this and others have this and this etc. different from his this. desha kaala vastu pariccchinnatvam is the essence of his ajnaana. 

Hence from whose reference it is Eka or Aneka jeeva vaadas? 

>From the point of the one who has misunderstanding that I am this local BMI, avidya is locussed on him, even though locus for anything and everything - avidya and vidyaa too - cannot but be Brahman since there is nothing other than Brahman. From Brahman point there is no vidyaa or avidyaa too. The ontological status is different. Local jeeva cannot create the world since it has to be sarvajna and sarvavit. If he has that he is no more jeeva. For him - Iswara who is sarvajnaa and Sarvavit is the creator. Jeeva-jagat-Iswara triad all are part of his ajnaana. If he has understood that everything is mithya and aham brahmasmi then this discussion itself is mute. 

Hari Om!
Sadananda