[Advaita-l] No Parinama in Brahman says Shankara Bhagavatpada

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Is that not obvious Venkataraghavan ji? I am seeing something going on.

Sudhanshu.

On Wed 26 Jun, 2019, 12:10 Venkatraghavan S, <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:

> Namaste Sudhanshuji,
> Why do you think there is something going on?
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>
> On Wed, 26 Jun 2019, 05:57 Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l, <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> Bhaskar ji,
>>
>> How does replacing avidyA by MAyA helps. It does not help one bit. What is
>> Ananya? Not different, right. If MAyA is not different from Brahman, then
>> the activity of MAyA is same as activity of Brahman. Even the cropping up
>> of upAdhi, so as to make upAdhi-drishti and svarupa-drishti possible, is
>> against the nishkriyatva of Brahman. No matter how many words are used,
>> the
>> very fact that there is something going on AND there is nothing except
>> Brahman, is against nishkriyatva.
>>
>> To say that there is something vyAvahArika and PArmArthika is again
>> against
>> nishkriyatva. How does vyAvahArika crops up. Same problem. Problem can be
>> resolved only if vyAvhArika is hare's horn. MithyAtva does not help. And
>> vyAvhArika is obviously not hare's horn.
>>
>> So problem persists unless we say that we will eventually understand this
>> when we will attain purity of mind.
>>
>> Sudhanshu
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed 26 Jun, 2019, 09:54 Bhaskar YR, <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:
>>
>> > praNAms Sri Sudhanshu prabhuji
>> > Hare Krishna
>> >
>> > Whether it is "gold appearing as ornament" or "bangle converting into
>> gold"
>> > -- there is activity. And that is against nishkriyatva.
>> >
>> > >  Your observation is quite logical and needs attention.  Yes, there
>> > needs to be some activity to accept the creation (whether it is vivarta
>> or
>> > pariNAma) hence Advaita when talking about brahma kArya (activity)
>> jagat it
>> > brings in apara brahma, when there is talk about nishkriya brahman it
>> > directly talks about parabrahma.  Kindly look at sUtra bhAshya 4.3.14.
>> Now
>> > the question, is this aparabrahman/ saguNa brahman/sOpAdhika
>> brahman/kArya
>> > brahman something different from parabrahman??  The obvious answer is
>> big
>> > NO, why??  Because, sadeva Soumya idamagra asit, ekamevAdviteeyaM
>> clarifies
>> > shruti.
>> >
>> > I understand that the standard answer would be -- from the point of view
>> > of gold, there is no activity. But from the point of view of gold,
>> there is
>> > no ornament itself.
>> >
>> > >  I would like to read this as :  from the point of view of gold ( can
>> > the brahman has the point of view!!??  Just wondering 😊 ) there is no
>> > activity since the socalled ornament (nAma rUpa kArya) is nothing but
>> gold
>> > (kAraNa) We may take note of the upAdhi drushti and svarUpa drushti as
>> well
>> > here to understand how jagat is nothing but brahman but brahman is not
>> > jagat.  When the ornament seen as ornament it is upAdhi drushti
>> (parichinna
>> > drushti) but when the same ornament seen as gold then it is svarUpa
>> > drushti.  Since there is no independent existence of ornament apart from
>> > gold, kArya 'as it is' anrutam but the same kArya is satyaM when it is
>> > viewed from its svarUpa drushti.  bhAshyakAra explains this in
>> chAndOgya :
>> > sarvaM cha nAmarUpAdi sadAtmanaiva satyaM vikArajAtaM svatastu anrutaM
>> eva,
>> > ... From the realization of sAmAnya behind all these vishesha-s only we
>> can
>> > find the answer to the question : kasminnu bhagavO vijnAte sarvamidaM
>> > vijnAtaM bhavati ??  he is the abhinna nimittOpadAna kAraNa of this
>> jagat
>> > hence the shruti statement : sarvaM khalvidaM brahma, sarvaM brahmamayaM
>> > jagat.
>> >
>> > The problem is -- gold CANNOT appear as ornament unless there is space
>> > which is different from gold. Brahman CANNOT appear as world unless
>> there
>> > is something different from Brahman. A singular object cannot appear as
>> > anything else. And that is not possible in advaita.
>> >
>> > >  it has been called as mAya (not avidyA atleast in my Advaita
>> dictionary
>> > though popularly floating theory is avidyA = mAya ) the shakti of
>> brahman
>> > which is  brahmAnanya.  That which has been  called as mUla prakruti
>> (again
>> > it is not mUlAvidyA which is an unwanted contribution by later
>> > vyAkhyAnakAra-s to shankarAdvaita) that is the brahma.  ( yA
>> mUlaprakrutiH
>> > abhyupagamyate tadeva cha nO brahma)  says sUtra bhAshya.  This mUla
>> > prakruti / shakti / mAya is the svarUpa of brahman hence lord in Geeta
>> > affectionately says : mama svarUpabhUtA madeeya mAyA.  I just wonder
>> what
>> > would have been the result had I replaced the word mAya with avidyA
>> here 😊
>> >
>> > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>> > bhaskar
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>
>