[Advaita-l] How do you explain this?

[H S Chandramouli]

Pranams Sri Sadananda Ji,

Reg  << Yes to all that but I am puzzled by your statement:

"That is because Brahman is ajnAta at this level, both in the role of
Iswara as well as in the entire dRishya prapancha, and remains uncognized"



What happened to the sarvajnatvam of Iswara? >>,



Sorry if I have created confusion. What I meant is both as Iswara (this is
what I meant by ** in the role of Iswara **) and as  the entire
dRisyaprapancha Brahman  remains uncognized ( by the jIvAs). It is not
intended to mean that Brahman remains uncognized by Iswara. I hope I have
clarified.





Regards



On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 5:59 PM kuntimaddi sadananda <
kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Chandramouliji - Yes to all that but I am puzzled by your statement:
>
> "That is because Brahman is ajnAta at this level, both in the role of
> Iswara as well as in the entire dRishya prapancha, and remains uncognized"
>
> -------
> What happened to the sarvajnatvam of Iswara?
>
> Hari Om!
> Sadananda
>
>
>
> On Saturday, January 19, 2019, 5:00:25 PM GMT+5:30, H S Chandramouli <
> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> PraNams Sri Sadananda Ji,
>
> Reg << The second one is Iswara as saguna Brahman who is karaNam-
> kaaraNam kartaa, etc. sarvajnatvam and sarvashaktitvam, antaryamin etc all
> at this level I suppose - here dRisyatvam is more valid as we are fully in
> the vyaavahaarika level. >>,
>
> Yes. But with a caveat. At the vyAvahArika level, this is mithya only,
> with Brahman (minus mAyA) as the satya adhishthAna, including Iswara and
> all other jIvAs. That is because Brahman is ajnAta at this level, both in
> the role of Iswara as well as in the entire dRishya prapancha, and remains
> uncognized. For example, in sushupti, wherein dRishya prapancha is absent
> but still Brahman remains uncognized. On the other hand, Brahman is the one
> and only Conscious entity, obtaining in and thru the entire dRishya
> prapancha, including all the other jIvAs. This is in contrast to other
> darshanAs which postulate multiple Conscious entities. From this standpoint
> of Consciousness (Brahman),  Iswara and all other jIvAs are all satya only,
> being Brahman only. Hence the advaitic sidhanta in a nutshell
>
> << श्लोकार्धेन प्रवक्ष्यामि यदुक्तं‌ ग्रन्थकोटिभिः|
> ब्रह्म सत्यं जगन्मिथ्या जीवो ब्रह्मैव नापरः || >>
>
> << shlokArdhena pravakShyAmi yaduktaM granthakoTibhiH|
>
> brahma satyaM jaganmithyA jIvo brahmaiva nAparaH || >>.
>
> Thus, Iswara (and other jIvAs) can be considered as satya or mithya
> depending upon standpoint. But all other entities in dRsyaprapancha, namely
> jagat, are mithyA only.,
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 3:35 PM kuntimaddi sadananda <
> kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Chandramouliji - PraNAms.
>
> You seem to be zeroing in in terms of the explanation. First one as you
> mentioned may be taTastha lakshnam - including the dRisyatvam aspect.
>
> The second one is Iswara as saguna Brahman who is karaNam- kaaraNam
> kartaa, etc. sarvajnatvam and sarvashaktitvam, antaryamin etc all at this
> level I suppose - here dRisyatvam is more valid as we are fully in the
> vyaavahaarika level.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> Hari Om!
> Sadananda
>
>
>
>
>
>
>