[Advaita-l] In Advaita alone the jiva is not jaDa

[kuntimaddi sadananda]

Subbuji - PraNAms

Let us first recognize that we cannot evaluate VishiShTaadvaita on the basis of Advaita or on logical grounds. What I have provided is not my explanation but what has been presented, as I understand. I grow up with that understanding. 

Moksha as per VishishTaadvaita is recognition of the Sesha-Seshee bhaava since the jeevas have an organic relationship with Iswara - just as the organs of the body to the individual. Hence Moksha involves going to VaikunTa and serving the Lord. By implication, there is intrinsic desha-kaala-vastu paricchinnatvam as part of the intrinsic doctrine. And that doctrine includes the fact that jeevas are chetana vastu and not achetana vastu. In VaikunTa they enjoy infinite happiness along with Iswara. Hence by proclamation, they enjoy everything except the power of creation. There is also a hierarchy of jeevas in Vaikunta - Lakshmi, Vishvakaseena, Garuda, Narada, etc are some privileged ones. In spite of that, you are happy their since Iswara seva includes seva of Bhaktas. In fact, the later one is glorified more. Lakshmana was serving the Lord, while Shatrughna was serving the servant of the Lord. 

How can that be? cannot be asked - naishaa tarkena matiraapaneya - the truth is beyond logic. They also differentiate the two types of jnaanams - dharma bhuuta jnanam and dharmi jnaanam - objective knowledge and the knowledge of the subject. Avidya includes both aspects to some extent. Jeeva does not have complete objective knowledge in contrast to Iswara and may not also have the self-knowledge. Having self-knowledge is not sufficient for Moksha and even if one has that one still cannot attain Moksha. In fact, as per Shree Ramanuja even the pursuit of self-knowledge (jnaanam as per Advaita) is considered as paradharma only and swadharma involves the pursuit of true knowledge that involves a clear understanding of the above state of affairs, which can only be gained by surrendering to the Lord, who by definition is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent. 

Most importantly, from the point of our discussion, the fact that they can gain the knowledge of Iswara itself implies that they are chatianya vastus and not jadams. achetana vastu cannot gain any knowledge- just as a rock.
The point is we cannot classify that they are jadams just because they do not meet our standards. 

If you say Dvaita also subscribes to a similar concept for jeeva, then by their proclamation they have to be chaitanya vastus only with inherent limitations. That they can gain knowledge is sufficient ground to dismiss the notion that they are jadams. 

One can, of course, question these doctrines using meemaamsa and come up with the correct path; provided if one is capable of doing that. Please remember that Vishishtadvaita and Dvaita to some extent do use Vedatantic declarations to arrive at their doctrines since they are considered as Vedic matams. 

If one is not able to come up with proper meemamsa, then swadharma requires to follow the traditional path inculcated by the family tradition. 

Even from the advaitic position at the transactional level, there are jeeva-jeeva bhinnatvam, jeeva-jagat bhinnatvam, Jeeva-Iswara bhinnatvam and jagat-Iswara bhinnatvam; only from the point of paarmaarthika satyam, all the bhinnatvams get sublimated and to recognize and realize that as a fact required the evolution of the mind. In Vishishtaadvaita, transactions will go on at the Moksha level too. Hence all the differences remain, other than the fact that once you have gone to Vaikunta there is no return back to samsaara - yat gatvaana na nivartante tat dhaama paramam mama and you will be enjoying infinite happiness there.  

Hari Om!
Sadananda


 

   On Saturday, July 21, 2018, 11:15:57 PM EDT, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote: 
 
 

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 8:36 PM, kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:

Subbuji - PraNAms


This does not mean jeevas are achetana vastu- They depend on Iswara for all physiological functions. Hence, He is called the controller and controls all the phenomenal world - akaasha, vaayu etc as per Kathopanishat statements. 

Sada ji, your explanation boils down to this: the jiva is chit no doubt but is a different kind of chit that Brahman/Vishnu is.  There really can't be any difference between two 'chit-s'.  If a difference is perceived/asserted, then it has to be only on the basis of some restriction, upadhi.  The jiva-chit has to be tainted with some or the other achit component.  Unless this is admitted, its difference from Brahman-chit cannot be explained.  

Jeeva thinks I am independent of Him - that forms his avidya. 

This is stated by Madhvas too: to think that one is independent is samsara and the correct thinking that one is ever-dependent on Vishnu is mukti. But one can see how the idea of 'eternal-dependence' is antithetical to the idea of liberation/moksha. 
regardssubbu 


---------------------