[Advaita-l] Ishwara srushti - shruti bhAshya sammata

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

There is a major problem with your understanding according to the DSV
Prakriya of Praachina Acharyas. If you read patiently you will understand.
There is no Vyaavahaarika Satya at all. What you are describing Vyavahaara
is really Praatibhaasika only. This understanding is directly coming from
equality of Waking and Dream States given by Gaudapaada and accepted by Adi
Sankara. If Dream = Waking it means there will only be Praatibhaasika Satya
in both Waking and Dream.

Therefore if you say Ishwara Srushti or Jeeva Srushti both are
Praatibhaasika only.  Vyavahaara is for dull minds is the Final Siddhanta
of Advaita.

On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> praNAms
>
> Hare Krishna
>
>
>
> I can now see the Big Problem you are having. For Advaitis there should
> not be any focus on Srushti but only on Adviteeya Brahma. Srushti is not
> the Main Message of Sruti. Srushti is not the Main Message of Bhashyakaara
> also. Srushti is not the Main Message of Gaudapaada. As a matter of fact he
> says there is NO Srushti. That is Ajaata Vaada.
>
>
>
> Ø  Now I could see where exactly you are erring in your assessment of my
> position J   I have never said the srushti krama is the main purpose of
> shruti or bhAshya.  Infact I have already clarified my stand that
> determining the srushti and its krama is not our purpose.. in my reply to
> Sri Sanju Nath prabhuji’s queries.  For that matter bhAshyakAra himself who
> after reiterating time and again that sarva vedAnteshu cha  Ishwara hetukA
> eva srushtayO vyapadishyante…tadeva cha Ishwarasya phalahetutvaM yat
> svakarmAnurUpAH prajAH srujateeti & Na yathOkta visheshaNasya jagataH
> yathOktavisheshaNaM IshvaraM muktvA anyataH pradhAnAt achetanAt, aNubhyaH,
> abhavAt, 'SAMSAARINO' vA utpattyAdi saMbhAvayitum shakyaM etc. also
> clarifies elsewhere in sUtra bhAshya : shruti teaching evolution is not
> really the purport to teach evolution as such because no fruits can be
> accrued through that knowledge.  And there is na nirOdhO, nachOtpattiH, na
> bandha no moksha is the paramArtha.  And note this stand of ajAtavAda does
> not give free license to attribute srushti to conditioned jeeva.  saMsAri
> jeeva is not the kartA of srushti it is possible only to Ishwara if at all
> you want to talk anything about creation and order of creation.  This is
> what mUlabhAshyakAra quite explicitly says in above bhAshya vAkya.  And
> this is what clearly declaring by shruti at various places.  As soon as you
> hear Ishwara srushti you are jumping to ajAtavAda and conveniently ignoring
> the anishta vAda of jeeva srushti of jagat.
>
> Ø
>
> Ø   In short, if there is a talk about srushti it has to be invariably
> attributed to Ishwara he is the ONLY capable person to do this work because
> he is the sarvajnA and sarvashakta though he has no body no senses there is
> none equal to or greater than Him.  His supreme power has been variously
> described and belonging to his very nature is His knowledge, strength and
> act he does the creation for the sake of karma bandha jeeva-s.  And this
> power of creation, knowledge of creation etc. is identical with the cause
> (kAraNa) and the effect (kArya) is identical with the power so says
> bhAshyakAra.  Hope atleast now, you would be able to grasp the point of
> contention I am trying to put-forth.
>
>
>
> Therefore why are we wasting time in arguing who is responsible for
> Srushti?
>
>
>
> Ø   The person who is responsible for srushti is Ishwara that is what
> shruti siddhAnta and that is what bhAshyakAra stand..And that srushti karta
> is karmAdhyaksha and karmaphala dAta as well…Hence bhAshyakAra confirms
> from the paramArtha drushti there is nothing apart from that hence no
> creation, no dissolution and from transactional point the kartA of this
> jagat is Ishwara with all his power.  Jeeva is the one does the creation of
> its own on already existing Ishwara srushti due to his avidyA.
> Parichinnatva, aparipUrNatva, asarvatvaM etc. is jeeva srushti due to which
> he succumbs to shOka-mOha or rAga-dvesha.  It is not just a time pass
> statement of bhAshyakAra nor he is simply wating his time to declare that
> in all vedAnta Ishwara is the hetu of the srushti and that is what is
> vedAnta maryAda which every sampradAyavAdins should follow.
>
>
>
>
>
> Who cares if it is Ishwara or if it is Jeeva?
>
>
>
> Ø   Shruti and bhAshyakAra care to clarify that it is brahman who is
> ahinna nimittOpadAna kAraNam of this jagat and HE is the one who thought of
> becoming many prior to creation.
>
>
>
>
>
> There is no Srushti. It is like arguing by two persons seeing a mirage
> water. One person is saying he will drink it first and another is saying he
> will drink it first.
>
>
>
> Ø    Ishrasrushti is dry land not the mirage water, Ishwara srushti is
> the stage to do vyavahAra and it is sApeksha srushti and the mirage water
> is prAtibhAsika  which is dependent on Ishwara srushti, if that is not the
> case if it is purely an imagination of bhrAnta jeeva without any
> adhishtAnaM, in place of water one could very well imagine snake in place
> of dry land, water in place of rope, a big elephant in place of shell
> …there is no limitations to whims and fancies of conditioned jeeva-s…
>
> Ø    Anyway, your above line of argument is  a convenient jump and
> digression from the topic to keep safe the pet theory of bhrAnta jeeva
> srushti.
>
>
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>
> bhaskar
>
>
>



-- 
Regards

-Venkatesh