[Advaita-l] Question about Avaccheda vada

[Raghav Kumar Dwivedula]

Namaste Subbu ji
Just wanted to check if the following is tenable.
In what is sought to be exemplified, we have three words
1. jivAtmA (or brahman with jivopAdhi)
2. sRShTikartA (who is sarvashaktimAn I.e., brahman with kAryopAdhi
identified with brahmA,viShNu,rudra where guNa association is present )
3. jagatkAraNam (brahman with kAraNopAdhi where even guNas are dormant but
it's still not NB )

The word Ishvara is used for either 2. or 3.based on the context but 2 and
3 are not synonymous ideas.

In the example,we have
1. ghaTAkAsha
2. maThAkAsha
3. mahAkAsha

We could provisionally say that the ghaTakAshas are all part of the largest
container viz., maThAkAsha. Or go deeper and say that mahAkAsha is the
ultimate kAraNam.

The same mahAkAsha is kAraNam wrt the gaThakAshas and even maThAkAsha (who
is like the prathamaja brahmA for a particular kalpa). Or mahakAsha from
its inherent standpoint is upAdhivarjita and so in the exemplified is like
NB.

There is no way to bypass saguNa Brahman or Ishvara and directly jump from
jivopAdhi to NB.

Om
Raghav



On 10-Feb-2018 11:06 AM, "Aditya Kumar via Advaita-l" <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Thanks for the relevant passages. This actually is very good. I had
> specifically mentioned reflection theory "as we understand today". In both
> cases, the jala surya example is not the same as reflection theory that is
> now understood. Even in this example of reflection of sun in water, what or
> where is ishwara? There is just jiva brahman and their aikya.
> --------------------------------------------
> On Sat, 10/2/18, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Question about Avaccheda vada
>  To: "Aditya Kumar" <kumaraditya22 at yahoo.com>
>  Cc: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
> vedanta.org>, "H S Chandramouli" <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
>  Date: Saturday, 10 February, 2018, 2:48 AM
>
>
>
>  On Sat,
>  Feb 10, 2018 at 7:58 AM, Aditya Kumar <kumaraditya22 at yahoo.com>
>  wrote:
>  Namaste,
>
>
>
>  If we try to remain faithful to Shankara bhashyas, a lot of
>  concepts seem alien to early Advaita Vedanta
>
>
>
>  (1) The fact is that Avaccheda vada is the most preferred
>  theory endorsed by Gaudapada Shankara and Vachaspati. The
>  reflection theory cannot be found in original bhashyas
>  "as we understand today".
>  There are several instances of
>  reflection analogy used by Shankara. One is:  BGB
>  15.7:
>
>
>  ममैवांशो जीवलोके
>  जीवभूतः
>  सनातनः ।
>  मनःषष्ठानीन्द्रियाणि
>  प्रकृतिस्थानि कर्षति
>  ॥ ७ ॥ भाष्यम्ममैव
>  परमात्मनः नारायणस्य,
>  अंशः भागः अवयवः एकदेशः
>  इति अनर्थान्तरं
>  जिवलोके जीवानां लोके
>  संसारे जीवभूतः कर्ता
>  भोक्ता इति प्रसिद्धः
>  सनातनः चिरन्तनः ; यथा
>  जलसूर्यकः सूर्यांशः
>  जलनिमित्तापाये
>  सूर्यमेव गत्वा न
>  निवर्तते च तेनैव
>  आत्मना गच्छति, एवमेव ;
>  यथा
>  घटाद्युपाधिपरिच्छिन्नो
>  घटाद्याकाशः आकाशांशः
>  सन्
>  घटादिनिमित्तापाये
>  आकाशं प्राप्य न
>  निवर्तते । अतः
>  उपपन्नम्
>  उक्तम् ‘यद्गत्वा
>  न निवर्तन्ते’ (भ. गी.
>  १५ ।
>  ६) इति ।
>
>  Here, in one place, Shankara gives both the pratibimba and
>  avaccheda examples to convey the same point.
>
>
>  ब्रह्मसूत्रभाष्यम्द्वितीयोऽध्यायःतृतीयः
>  पादः सूत्रम् ५० -
>  भाष्यम्………
>  आभास एव च एष जीवः
>  परस्यात्मनो जलसूर्यकादिवत्प्रतिपत्तव्यः,
>  न स एव साक्षात् , नापि
>  वस्त्वन्तरम् ।
>  अतश्च………
>  BSB
>  3.2..
>
>
>  अत एव
>  चोपमा सूर्यकादिवत् ॥
>  १८ ॥ भाष्यम्यत एव च
>  अयमात्मा चैतन्यरूपो
>  निर्विशेषो
>  वाङ्मनसातीतः
>  परप्रतिषेधोपदेश्यः,
>  अत एव च
>  अस्योपाधिनिमित्तामपारमार्थिकीं
>  विशेषवत्तामभिप्रेत्य
>  जलसूर्यकादिवदित्युपमा
>  उपादीयते
>  मोक्षशास्त्रेषु —
>  ‘यथा ह्ययं
>  ज्योतिरात्मा
>  विवस्वानपो भिन्ना
>  बहुधैकोऽनुगच्छन् ।
>  उपाधिना क्रियते
>  भेदरूपो देवः
>  क्षेत्रेष्वेवमजोऽयमात्मा’
>  इति, ‘एक एव हि भूतात्मा
>  भूते भूते
>  व्यवस्थितः । एकधा
>  बहुधा चैव दृश्यते
>  जलचन्द्रवत्’ (ब्र. बिं.
>  १२) इति चैवमादिषु ॥ १८
>  ॥
>
>  In fact the reflection theory comes out as a favourite of
>  Shankara very often. The Upanishads too give this analogy
>  often. See the Kathopanishat.
>
>  Nonetheless confining to the topic,
>  if we have explain Jiva ishwara and brahman from Avaccheda
>  theory, we have few pointers :
>
>  (a) The idea that ishwara is another ghata or mathakasha
>  cannot be found in the original works of Gaudapada, Shankara
>  and Vachaspati Misra.
>
>  If it is explicitly stated by
>  someone, there is nothing wrong in having it as the very
>  idea of Ishwara as non-jiva and non-NB is quite happily
>  admitted by all Acharyas of all times.
>  vs
>
>  (b) When we speak of Ishwara as the creator, the creatorship
>  is imagined or superimposed or mistaken or as Subrahmanianji
>  said, adhyaropa done by shastras. In any case, the delusion
>  is that of jiva and Ishwara remains the same throughout as
>  akarta, samsara guna vargita.
>
>  (c) That Ishwara the creator has sattva guna as predominant
>  - this idea cannot be found in prasthana traya bhashya. As
>  indicated in another thread, Ishwara is without any guna
>  vishesha or guna sambandha. Else it will be a samsari.
>
>  (d) The idea that a predominant sattva guna does not veil
>  the self is another concept alien to SD itself.
>
>
>
>  Hence my understanding is that, by the potency of Ishwara,
>  the true nature of Jiva is veiled. In this state there is
>  jiva-ishwara, but on release there is no jiva-ishwara only
>  brahman. So at no point does Ishwara sets out to create and
>  hence justifiably there cannot be any guna karma association
>  for ishwara whether in vyavaharika or paramarthika.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>