[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: Bhagavad Gita - As it actually is | Sanatana Dharma | Sri Shankara Bhagavatpada & Bhakti | Sringeri

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Bhaskar Ji,

Reg // And when it has been well established that the jagat which is an
effect of Brahman is itself non-different from Brahman //,

//  another synonym of this mAya i.e. avyAkruta also clearly said brahman
and nothing but brahman before creation and there is no difference between
these two!! //.

The term avyAkruta  is understood differently in different contexts in the
Bhashya. In some places it addresses Atman itself. In some other places it
addresses Iswara (Shuddha Brahman or Atman with mAyA). In yet other places
it addresses just mAyA or jagat. This is stated so in the Bhashya itself.

An effect maybe  nondifferent from cause. But it cannot be said cause is
nondifferent from effect. Jagat is neither different nor nondifferent from
 Shuddha Brahman. mAyA also is neither different nor nondifferent from
Shuddha Brahman.

I have given the Bhashya reference BGB 14-27 for your earlier citation and
the implications thereof. That Bhashya part does not state mAyA or jagat as
nondifferent from Shuddha Brahman. But it does state Shakti to be
understood as Iswara Shakti (meaning thereby Iswara itself as Shakti and
not Iswara’s Shakti) . This is ananya with Shuddha Brahman.

But I do agree that we have addressed  this issue several times earlier
without agreement.

Regards

On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 5:01 PM Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at hitachienergy.com>
wrote:

> It does not posit ananyatvam as between Brahman and mAyA. On the other
> hand, it presents Shuddha Brahman and Iswara as ananya.
>
> BGB  14-27 // … यया च ईश्वरशक्त्या भक्तानुग्रहादिप्रयोजनाय ब्रह्म
> प्रतिष्ठते प्रवर्तते, सा शक्तिः ब्रह्मैव अहम् , शक्तिशक्तिमतोः अनन्यत्वात्
>  इत्यभिप्रायः । //
>
> // …..yayA cha IshvarashaktyA bhaktAnugrahAdiprayojanAya brahma
> pratiShThate pravartate, sA shaktiH brahmaiva aham , shaktishaktimatoH
> ananyatvAt ityabhiprAyaH | //
>
> praNAms Sri ChandramouLi prabhuji
>
> Hare Krishna
>
> For the sake of brevity I have deleted rest of your message (Kannada
> translation as well).  If the Ishwara tattva is clear then I think
> ananyatvaM between Ishwara and brahman and Ishwara and his shakti (mAya)
> can easily be understood.  Here you are saying that brahman and Ishwara as
> ananya but brahman and mAya are different.  I am not able to understand
> this.  Is this  Ishwara without shakti or with shakti??  With shakti
> (sarvashakta) jnAna (sarvajna) brahman itself called Ishwara is it not??
> When it is called Ishwara (brahman) and his shakti NOT different, I am
> really not able to understand anyatvaM (difference) between mAya and
> brahman.  The mAya carries synonym ‘mUlaprakruti’ and it has been said that
> it is brahman, another synonym ‘akshara’ has again been equated with
> brahman, and another synonym of this mAya i.e. avyAkruta also clearly said
> brahman and nothing but brahman before creation and there is no difference
> between these two!!  So, I am really unable to understand your equation
> i.e. Ishwara=brahman BUT mAya is NOT equal to brahman.  Here what exactly
> is the difference between Ishwara (with  mAya) and brahman to say they are
> different and what strikes the equality between brahman and ishwara
> (without mAya)!!??
>
> And when it has been well established that the jagat which is an effect of
> Brahman is itself non-different from Brahman, does it not follow
> automatically that Brahma mAyA too is not different from Brahman? Or am I
> missing something here??
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>
> bhaskar
>