Fwd: jivas' abode during deep sleep/praLaya

[V Subrahmanian]

Re-posting an old post on the above topic. 

Namaste

For the Bh. Gita verse 15.7 ममैवांशो जीवलोके जीवभूत: सनातन: । मन:षष्ठानीन्द्रियाणि प्रकृतिस्थानि कर्षति ॥ ७ ॥
the commentary, in part, of Sri Sridhara Swamin is:

अयं भावः -- सत्यं सुषुप्तिप्रलयोरपि मदंशत्वात्सर्वस्यापि जीवमात्रस्य मयि लयादस्त्येव मत्प्राप्तिः तथाप्यविद्ययावृतस्य सानुशयस्य सप्रकृतिके मयि लयो न तु शुद्धे। तदुक्तम् -- 'अव्यक्ताद्व्यक्तयः सर्वाः प्रभवन्ति' (8.18).इत्यादिना।

Translation:

This is the purport: It is true that the entirety of the jivas, being My amshas, will resolve into Me during deep sleep and dissolution and therefore they 'attain' Me.  Yet, owing to the fact that the jiva-s are under the spell of AvidyA, owing to the continuance of avidyA, they resolve into My prakRti-associated form (another word could be: mAyAshabalite mayi) and NOT My Pure form (uncontaminated by mAyA).  Thus it is said by the Lord 'from the unmanifest all the manifest beings emerge' (8.18).

This is a fine explanation to the question: In deep sleep (and dissolution) whether the jiva-s merge in Brahman?  The question becomes important since if it is held that they do merge in Brahman, how indeed can they emerge later as the Bh.Gita itself teaches: 'यद्गत्वा न निवर्तन्ते तद्धाम परमं मम ॥१५- ६॥' [Having attained That,  jiva-s do not return to samsara]

So, since such a question/doubt deserves to be answered, the commentators have taken special effort to make a clarification of the above stated nature (Sridhara swamin's commentary).

It would be beneficial to note that Bhagavatpada Shankara has said this in the Mandukya Upanishad (mantra 2) bhashya:
(I am quoting a fairly lengthy part of this bhashya so that the purport thereof is appreciated fully -  the red-highlighted sentences below translate to the Sridhara Swamin's commentary cited above.  One can read the translation of the below-cited bhashya in Sw.Gambhirananda's book.)

कथं प्राणशब्दत्वं अव्याकृतस्य  ।  "प्राणबन्धनं हि सोम्य मनः"(छा.उ६  । ८  । २) इति श्रुतेः  । 

ननु तत्र"सदेव सोम्य"(छा.उ६  । २  । १) इति प्रकृतं सद्ब्रह्म प्राणशब्दवाच्यम्  । 

नैष दोषो बीजात्मकत्वाभ्युपगमात्सतः  । यद्यपि तद्ब्रह्म प्राणशब्दवाच्यं तत्र तथापि जीवप्रसवबीजात्मकत्वं अपिरत्यज्य एव प्राणशब्दत्वं सतः सच्छब्दवाच्यता च  । यदि हि निर्बीजरूपं विवक्षितं ब्रह्माभविष्यत् "नेति नेति"(बृ.उ.४.४.२)"यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते"(तै.उ.२.९)"अन्यदेव तद्विदितादथाविदितात्"(के.उ१.३) इत्यवक्ष्यत् । "न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते"(गीता.१३.१२) इति स्मृतेः  । निर्बीजतयैव चेत्सति लीनानां सुषुप्तप्रलययोः पुनरुत्थानानुपपत्तिः स्यात् । मुक्तानां च पुनरुत्पत्तिप्रसङ्गो बीजाभावाविशेषात् । ज्ञानदाह्यबीजाभावे च ज्ञानानर्थक्यप्रसङ्गः  ।

तस्मात्सबीजत्वाभ्युपगमेन एव सतः प्राणत्वव्यपदेशः सर्वश्रुतिषु च कारणत्वव्यपदेशः  ।

 

अत एव"अक्षरात्परतः परः"(मु.उ२.१.२)  ।

"सबाह्याभ्यान्तरो ह्यजः" (मु.उ२.१.२)  ।

"यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते"(तै.उ२.९)  ।

"नेति नेति"(बृ.उ४.४.१२) इत्यादिना बीजवत्वापनयनेन व्यपदेशः  ।

तां बीजावस्थां तस्यैव प्राज्ञशब्दवाच्यस्य तुरीयत्वेन देहादिसंबन्धजाग्रदादिरहितां पारमार्थिकीं पृथग्वक्ष्यति  ।

बीजावस्थापि न किञ्चिदवेदिषमित्युत्थितस्य प्रत्ययदर्शनाद्देहेऽनुभूयत एवेति त्रिधा देहे व्यवस्थितेत्युच्यते  । ।२ । ।

regards

subrahmanian.v

 

[Jaishankar Narayanan]

Namaste,

Even those who claim that avidya is non-existence (abhAva) accept the avyakta (unmanifest) as a potential / causal state during mahApralaya for all jIvas, in which the jIvas remain till they reemerge during the next cycle of creation. They accept that this avyakta is also called mAyA, avyAkrta, prakrti etc. and it is tattva-anyatbhyAm-anirvachanIyA (mithyA).  Now why should every day sleep be any different as a potential / causal state? Since the potential / causal state does not have any divisions / differences, the total potential state cannot be distinguished from individual potential state. Although from individual's / jIva's standpoint we call the bIja as avidya and from the total / Isvara's standpoint we call the bIja as mAyA, it is the same. We need not unnecessarily differentiate between these two and create an illogical prakriyA because of the misunderstanding of some people.  

BSB 1.4.3 bhashya makes it clear.

मुक्तानां च पुनरनुत्पत्तिः । कुतः ? विद्यया तस्या बीजशक्तेर्दाहात् । अविद्यात्मिका हि बीजशक्तिरव्यक्तशब्दनिर्देश्या परमेश्वराश्रया मायामयी महासुषुप्तिः, यस्यां स्वरूपप्रतिबोधरहिताः शेरते संसारिणो जीवाः । तदेतदव्यक्तं क्वचिदाकाशशब्दनिर्दिष्टम् — ‘एतस्मिन्नु खल्वक्षरे गार्ग्याकाश ओतश्च प्रोतश्च’ (बृ. उ. ३ । ८ । ११) इति श्रुतेः; क्वचिदक्षरशब्दोदितम् — ‘अक्षरात्परतः परः’ (मु. उ. २ । १ । २) इति श्रुतेः; क्वचिन्मायेति सूचितम् — ‘मायां तु प्रकृतिं विद्यान्मायिनं तु महेश्वरम्’ (श्वे. उ. ४ । १०) इति मन्त्रवर्णात् । अव्यक्ता हि सा माया, तत्त्वान्यत्वनिरूपणस्याशक्यत्वात् । तदिदं ‘महतः परमव्यक्तम्’ इत्युक्तम् — अव्यक्तप्रभवत्वान्महतः, यदा हैरण्यगर्भी बुद्धिर्महान् । यदा तु जीवो महान् तदाप्यव्यक्ताधीनत्वाज्जीवभावस्य महतः परमव्यक्तमित्युक्तम् । अविद्या ह्यव्यक्तम्; अविद्यावत्त्वेनैव जीवस्य सर्वः संव्यवहारः सन्ततो वर्तते । 

Without that latent / potential causal state, the absence of birth for the freed individuals cannot be explained. Why? Because liberation comes when· the potential power (of Maya) is burnt away by knowledge. That potential power, constituted by ignorance, is mentioned by the word unmanifest. It rests on Isvara, and is comparable to magic. It is a kind of deep slumber in which the transmigrating individuals sleep without any consciousness of their real nature. This thing, that is avyakta, is sometimes referred to by the word space / AkAsha, as stated in the text, "By the Immutable, O Gargi, is (the unmanifest) space / AkAsha pervaded" (Br. Up. III. viii. 11). Sometimes it is called the immutable as in, "Higher than the higher immutable" (Mu. Up. II. i. 2); sometimes it is called Maya as in, "Know Maya to be prakriti / Nature and the master of Maya to be the great maheshvara" (Sv. IV. 10). That Maya is surely unmanifest, for it can neither be ascertained as real nor as unreal. This is why it has been stated that "Avyakta is higher than mahat" (Ka. I. iii. 11); for if the cosmic intelligence of Hiranyagarbha be meant by the word mahat, then avyakta is higher than mahat, for mahat springs from the former. If, however, the individual being be the meaning of mahat (vide end of commentary on I. iv. 1), still the statement, "Avyakta is higher than mahat", is admissible, since the state of becoming an individual depends on avyakta (Maya as upAdhi). For ignorance is avyakta; and it is because of the possession of ignorance by the individual  that all kinds of empirical behaviour continue for ever.

with love and prayers,

Jaishankar

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te3HqxKSxsrJ3nO7AJv9RFX5vqUAtV-0hw-GAC43pc46wA%40mail.gmail.com.

[suresh srinivasamurthy]

Namaste Subbu-ji,

If avidya is the root cause for birth of ordinary jivas, what is the cause for the avatAra of jnAnIs like Sri Shankara and the Lord who are nityamuktas? It is also said that these avatArAs are repeated in every kalpa. If it is said that it is due to their own sankalpa then it would make Brahman saguna. So how to reconcile nirguNatva/Nishkriyatva of Brahman with the avatArAs of nitya muktAs? 

The teaching in Vivek chUDAaNi - "BrahmAsrayA triguNAtmika mAyA asti" - points to the fact that mAyA continues to exist potentially as a dependent entity on Brahman. That would again make Brahman saguna. 

Look forward to your clarification.

Namaste,

Suresh

---

From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Jaishankar Narayanan <jai...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2023 2:10 PM
To: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com>
Cc: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Subject: Re: [advaitin] Fwd: jivas' abode during deep sleep/praLaya

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAOkLS-GS_iv0%2BQSKoTJ7VxrQJ6Hq2dxaeQt2mM0cSPB2OpRb_w%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Suresh prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

If avidya is the root cause for birth of ordinary jivas, what is the cause for the avatAra of jnAnIs like Sri Shankara and the Lord who are nityamuktas?

 

• The cause is iccha to do ‘uddhaara’ of dharma, tadAtmAnAm srujAmyahaM, see geeta shloka for example.  So in this there is lord, there is ajnAni jeeva, there is stage called jagat wherein jeeva experiencing his/her karma phala etc.  But behold!!  These are all hold water ONLY in the module like SDV which is when compared to DSV & AV something inferior and meant for madAdhikAri-s in jnAnamArga.  Shankara in sUtra bhAshya says sages like apAntaratama-s etc. dragging their own prArabdha and takes birth as per the instructions of paramAtma to uplift the dharma etc.  This again proves that there are some elevated souls which have the capacity/adhikAra to re-incarnate and some other (ordinary) souls get full & final mOksha without any special / additional powers.

 

It is also said that these avatArAs are repeated in every kalpa. If it is said that it is due to their own sankalpa then it would make Brahman saguna. So how to reconcile nirguNatva/Nishkriyatva of Brahman with the avatArAs of nitya muktAs? 

 

Ø     As said above, all these are hold good in the module like SDV, just vyAvahArika and ultimately no srushti, no jnAni, no mumukshu and NO mOksha/ mukta-s. 

 

The teaching in Vivek chUDAaNi - "BrahmAsrayA triguNAtmika mAyA asti" - points to the fact that mAyA continues to exist potentially as a dependent entity on Brahman. That would again make Brahman saguna. 

 

Ø     There is shakti and shakta abedha when it comes to mAya and Ishwara from this no Advaita hAni.  But when it is said mAya is avidyA then there is anishta prasanga that brahman is having avidyA as his power.  And some in Advaita would agree to this and argue: yes it is brahma who is having avidyA and this avidyA is having the locus in brahman even before the creation of jagat.  The notorious mUlAvidyAvAda in the later vyAkhyAnakAra-s work which completely ignores the adhyAsavAda of shankara and propagates the mUlAvidyAvAda.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

 

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

This is not reply to any mail, but sharing my observations jeeva, avyakta/mAya and avidyA.  We have done and dusted sUtra bhAshya 1.4.3 in this list itself somany times earlier, so need for autopsy once again as there is nothing new has been said sofar. 

 

By the way when we say avidyA is in the form of abhAva we say that it is jnana-abhAva that is called avidyA not that avidyA itself is abhAva, I hope one can understand the difference between avidyA is jnana abhAva AND avidyA is in itself abhAva. 

 

First of all as we have been reiterating avidyA and mAya are not same.  In srushti mAya is Ishwara shakti and avidyA is jeeva’s antaHkaraNa dOsha.  There are ample of references in bhAshya to treat avidyA and mAya differently.  Just by holding avidyAtmikA hi beeja shaktiH avyakta Shabda nirdeshya (1.4.3)  and trying to strike the synonymity is futile exercise because avyakta and avidyA are used with different meanings everywhere.  At one place, bhAshyakAra compares avidyA as poison (visha) and avyAkruta as anna this one example is enough to stop the imagination of synonymity between avidyA and mAya/avyakta.  Mama svarUpabhUtA madeeya mAya says lord what is ‘svarUpa’ of lord / brahman is not avidyA but it is his svabhAva if the mAya = avidyA then avidyA would become brahman’s svarUpa and svabhAva that which cannot be eradicated with any quantity of jnana.  Moreover brahmAtmaikya jnana should happen through the complete eradication of ajnAna and this nishesha nirmUlana of ajnAna happens through the determination of true nature of brahman.  And interestingly to realize this true nature of brahman we need the nAmarUpAtmaka jagat if this jagat itself is not there brahman’s intrinsic nature could never have been determined warns bhAshyakAra  : yadi hi nAmarUpa na vyAkreeyete tadA asyAtmanO nirupAdhikaM rUpaM prajnAna ghanAkhyaM ‘na pratikhyAyeta’.  vidyA cannot create anything new nor it destroys anything that is already existing it only reveals what is really existing in its svarUpa and that svarUpa of jagat is brahman and jnana removes the abrahmatvaM and asarvatvaM of that jagat and the jnana  does not spin the jagat in thin air nor making the jagat to vanish…na tu paramArthikaM vastu kartuM nivartayitum vA arhati brahmavidyA clarifies shankara.  It is in this sense it has been said the sUkshma and stUla deha of jeeva is the effect of mAya and jeeva’s false identification with it is called adhyAsa (dehAtmabhAva, ahamkara, mamakAra)  due to abhAva of his svarUpa jnana.  When this wrong identification (anyathAgrahaNa/ vipareeta grahaNa) completely eradicated the jeeva would establishes himself in sarvAtmabhAva without identifying himself with limited compartment of his individual BMI. 

[Bhaskar YR]

मुक्तानां च पुनरनुत्पत्तिः । कुतः ? विद्यया तस्या बीजशक्तेर्दाहात्

 

praNAms Hare Krishna

 

After reading above bhAshya vAkya and thinking about equating avyAkruta with avidyA beeja shakti which has been completely burnt by jnana so that jnAni-s (mukta-s) would get punarAvrutti rahita mukti etc. I am getting additional doubt if avyAkruta jagat which is vyAkruta for the jnAni-s and ajnAni-s equally prior to jnana, if the jnAni’s vyAkruta jagat turns to ashes after jnana what happens to other ajnAni-s vyakruta jagat??  Is vyAkruta jagat is separate for each and every ajnAni??  And the ajnAni-s bodies also born from avyAkruta nAma rupa (unmanifested form) and this body is the base to experience the fruits of karma and if this avyakta is burnts by ones’ vidyA the beeja shakti of all the other jeeva-s also have been burnt to ashes and immediately after getting rid of avyAkruta (if at all this is the avidyA itself) all of them should have got realized without the efforts of their own!! Is it not??  We cannot bring-in here EJV to say all other jeeva-s are just imaginary because this bhAshyavAkya etc. talking about ‘some’ mukta-s and their subsequent birthless jnAna and ‘some’ other jeeva-s still in deep slumber (mahAsupti) with avidyA etc.  And Ishwara, as we know, ishwaratva will be decided prakruti dvaya (prakruti dvayatvameva hi ishwarasya ishwaratvaM) if this avyAkruta prakruti itself burnt to ashes then ishwara is no more ishwara and in Advaita vedAnta IshwarAnugraha, ishwara kAruNya, he is karma phala dAta etc. goes for a big toss and Advaita Vedanta becomes nireeshwara vAda like sAnkhya.  But ishwara as per Advaita is nityeshwara and he is avidyA vinirmukta (nityeshwaratvAt Ishwarasya). 

 

And Ishwara’s mAya if equated with jeeva’s avidyA ( like comparing individual sushupti with mahAsupti / pralaya etc. to strike the conclusions that mAya=avidyA,  illogically or out of context) then ishwara become jeeva and jeeva become Ishwara the difference between two in sadhana mArga would vanish and the path of progress taught in katha quoted in this very sUtra bhAshya would be pointless and fruitless. 

 

So, when bhAshya talks about jnana is burning something it cannot be the jagat in its avyAkruta rUpa it must be something else, one needs to cautiously make the conclusion before equating mAya/avyakta with avidyA!!. 

[Jaishankar Narayanan]

Namaste,

See below

On Fri, 15 Sept, 2023, 10:57 am 'Bhaskar YR' via advaitin, <adva...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

This is not reply to any mail, but sharing my observations jeeva, avyakta/mAya and avidyA.  We have done and dusted sUtra bhAshya 1.4.3 in this list itself somany times earlier, so need for autopsy once again as there is nothing new has been said sofar. 

 

By the way when we say avidyA is in the form of abhAva we say that it is jnana-abhAva that is called avidyA not that avidyA itself is abhAva, I hope one can understand the difference between avidyA is jnana abhAva AND avidyA is in itself abhAva. 

Jai: So you finally accept avidyA is kinchid bhAvarupa

 

First of all as we have been reiterating avidyA and mAya are not same.  In srushti mAya is Ishwara shakti and avidyA is jeeva’s antaHkaraNa dOsha.  There are ample of references in bhAshya to treat avidyA and mAya differently.  Just by holding avidyAtmikA hi beeja shaktiH avyakta Shabda nirdeshya (1.4.3)  and trying to strike the synonymity is futile exercise because avyakta and avidyA are used with different meanings everywhere.  At one place, bhAshyakAra compares avidyA as poison (visha) and avyAkruta as anna this one example is enough to stop the imagination of synonymity between avidyA and mAya/avyakta. 

Jai: Arguing based on analogies is not a good strategy. What is poison for jIva need not be poison for Ishvara. In fact it is a Shakti for Isvara. Like even what is poison for you is not a poison for a snake. For snake the poison is a power which gets it, the needed food.

Mama svarUpabhUtA madeeya mAya says lord what is ‘svarUpa’ of lord / brahman is not avidyA but it is his svabhAva if the mAya = avidyA then avidyA would become brahman’s svarUpa and svabhAva that which cannot be eradicated with any quantity of jnana.  Moreover brahmAtmaikya jnana should happen through the complete eradication of ajnAna and this nishesha nirmUlana of ajnAna happens through the determination of true nature of brahman.  And interestingly to realize this true nature of brahman we need the nAmarUpAtmaka jagat if this jagat itself is not there brahman’s intrinsic nature could never have been determined warns bhAshyakAra  : yadi hi nAmarUpa na vyAkreeyete tadA asyAtmanO nirupAdhikaM rUpaM prajnAna ghanAkhyaM ‘na pratikhyAyeta’.  vidyA cannot create anything new nor it destroys anything that is already existing it only reveals what is really existing in its svarUpa and that svarUpa of jagat is brahman and jnana removes the abrahmatvaM and asarvatvaM of that jagat and the jnana  does not spin the jagat in thin air nor making the jagat to vanish…na tu paramArthikaM vastu kartuM nivartayitum vA arhati brahmavidyA clarifies shankara. 

Jai: I don't claim that jagat perception will end and it will vanish on gaining of AtmajnAnam. That is the claim of those who say avidyA is only the projected adhyAsa. jnAnam does destroy ajnAnam which covers one's svarupa as stated by the bhAshya and bhagavan in the Gita.