[Advaita-l] Fwd: A question on PariNAma and vivarta

[D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ]

You cannot wear a lump of gold on your finger as you can a ring. Looking
from the point of utility the lump of gold and the ring are different. A
real transformation has taken place and this transformation requires a
goldsmith's effort. So is the case with a lump of earth and a pot.

For me real example of vivarta is rajjusarpa bhranti.



regards,
Sarma.

On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 8:02 AM, kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Venkatraghavanji - PraNAms
>
> You have zeroed-in on the very purpose of the three examples scripture
> provided to establish that the creation itself is vivarta since
>
>
> a) Brahman being infinite cannot undergo real modification to create the
> universe.
>
> 2. Brahman is still the upaadaana kaarana - yatovaa imaani bhuttani
> jaayante ... shruti declares.
>
>
> 3. Only way to account both 1 and 2 is to introduce the concept of vivarta
> which I call it as transformation-less transformation - that is apparent
> transformation.- vaachaarambhanam vikaaraH.
>
> 4. Gold example provides clear insight into this - yatova imaani
> aabhaanaani jaayante, and most importantly, sustence and laya .. tat
> swarnam. Hence it is vivarta.
>
>
> 5. Parinaama applies only to transformations within the jagat - ring
> transforming into bangle, etc. and 1 and 2 cannot be accounted by parinaama
> since sthiti and laya are not possible - Vidyaranya clearly states this in
> the ch. 13.
>
>
> 6. We do not need some intricate logic to prove that mud and gold
> trasformation is parinaama.
>
> 7. I can simply prove that everything in the world also vivarta - since
> they are nothing mere assemblage of fundamental particles -
> electrons-protons and neutrons or even more fundamental particles - from
> which all objects came, by which they are sustained and into which they go
> back.
>
>
> 8. The strength of Advaita is to differentiate the ontological status of
> Brahman from the world of plurality - Same applies to the Ontological
> status of gold in relation to ornaments or mud in relation to pots and
> cannot simply apply this to mild to curds without using some concocted
> logic of fundamental particles as the starting point.
>
>
> 9. Further hair splitting arguments will not lead to any more new
> knowledge if we understand simply that Brahman to world transformation is
> only vivarta or apparent transformation as indicated by the
> vaachaarambhanam sruti and tatasta lakshana  -  jnamaadyasya yataH.
>
>
> 10. Now  I am reveling on the beauty of Vidyaranyas  exposition of how
> maaya shakti acts as universal force diverging into many others that we are
> familiar.
>
> Hari Om!
>
> Sadananda
>
>       From: Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
> vedanta.org>
>
>
> Going to the broader question of what the vAcArambhaNa shruti is trying to
> establish - is it the absence of independent existence of kArya from
> kAraNa, or is it to establish that jagat is a vivarta of Brahman?
>
> The bhAshya to BS 1.4.23 gives a clue. The sUtra itself is helpful in the
> current discussion प्रकृतिश्च प्रतिज्ञादृष्टांतानुपरोधात् - the drishTAnta
> and the pratijnA must not be in contradiction, hence Brahman must be the
> material cause too.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>