Four bhavas that direct to Advaita

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

I am reposting from the reply to Bhaskar-ji in the chatgpt thread.

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

There are at least four valid "bhavas" that the shastras accept, as ways of grounding the duality we experience in the advaitic knowledge of Brahman, withdrawing attention from the former and shifting to the latter. 

First is the basic bhakti-based "jiva (dvaita) bhava" that regards Existence as being tripartite - consisting of ishvara, jiva, jagat. jiva avidya (ignorance) is different from ishvara maya. jiva is samsarin, jagat is jada, ishvara is the Lord who projects and withdraws creation for the sake of the jivas to work out their karmas and is their karmaphaladaata. The jiva centers its life singularly in the presence of ishvara and His worship (through karma yoga etc.).

Second is Ishvara bhava: Everything (all differentiation/duality including of change and causality) is the dream/imagination of the non-dual Dreamer through His Maya. Lila of the Divine Mother. This Maya=jnana-iccha-kriya shakti of the Self is the moolam of both the ishvara maya and the jiva avidya of the jiva bhava (dream) state. Hence it may also be referred to as mula-avidya of the Self through which the Self appears/projects/imagines as world, jiva etc. 

Dream level: jiva has avidya, does karma, etc. Dreamer level: Self alone exists and Self alone manifests jiva-bhava awareness and its limiting adjuncts of vidya and avidya, as well as all namarupa objects. And Self alone decides how to perpetuate the dream based on the self-identifications within that dream. That non-dual Self I am, even though I imagine self in this BMI and not-self as that world 'outside'. 

Third is Maya/Avidya bhava: Brahman in its true 'nature' or paramarthika standpoint is unblemished by duality. Duality, however affirmed, is a case of adhyasa (like imagination). Even Ishvara bhava involves the superimposition of Dreamer-dream duality on the Self. The cause of such adhyasa is Maya=mula-avidya, and the duality that appears in consciousness is deemed only the modification/projection of Maya/Avidya. But note that Maya itself appears as an "existing entity" only in the dream that Maya is said to project on Self. This circularity or infinite regress conundrum reveals to us that Maya and its projection are all mithya, anirvachaniya. And when one says Maya is anirvachaniya, it automatically contradicts statements like "it is a separate existing entity" because it is neither asat nor sat. It has the status akin to illusion or imagination or mirage. Avidya bhava is not meant to emphasize reality of avidya, but to direct attention away from All dualistic identifications, divisions, differentiations (that in jiva-bhava appear as due to ishvara maya or jiva avidya) to the paramarthika advaita satya of Brahman. 

Fourth is Brahma bhava: Everything is Brahman only. The All is reduced to nama-rupa denotation of Brahman, like ring and necklace of Gold. All duality is brahma-svarupa and when we realize the non-dual Self in all identifications; there is not even room for speaking in terms of avidya vs maya, or doership and causality, because there is only Brahman denoted in (and substratum of) all such word-objects. Their "other" meanings constitute the mithya world of the jiva-bhava. (Since duality is still acknowledged, Brahman identified in this manner is still Ishvara in a higher sense.)

All these have validity in the vyavaharika standpoint only.

thollmelukaalkizhu

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Putran prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

There are at least four valid "bhavas" that the shastras accept, as ways of grounding the duality we experience in the advaitic knowledge of Brahman, withdrawing attention from the former and shifting to the latter. 

 

Ø     Yes prabhuji, I liked this perspective especially when shAstra talking about avidyA it is aiming the jeeva bhAva / jeeva and asking him to get rid of this avidyA.  So your 4 types of bhAva and its respective perspectives quite admirable to understand Advaita siddhAnta in a better way.  If you permit me I shall share my observations as well :

 

First is the basic bhakti-based "jiva (dvaita) bhava" that regards Existence as being tripartite - consisting of ishvara, jiva, jagat. jiva avidya (ignorance) is different from ishvara maya. jiva is samsarin, jagat is jada, ishvara is the Lord who projects and withdraws creation for the sake of the jivas to work out their karmas and is their karmaphaladaata. The jiva centers its life singularly in the presence of ishvara and His worship (through karma yoga etc.).

 

Ø     Yes, I completely understand and agree with this perspective.  All karma, bhakti, dhyAna, archana, sAdhana, jnAna to be achieved / realized everything said in shAstra for the sake of jeeva only who is under the influence of avidyA. 

 

Second is Ishvara bhava: Everything (all differentiation/duality including of change and causality) is the dream/imagination of the non-dual Dreamer through His Maya. Lila of the Divine Mother. This Maya=jnana-iccha-kriya shakti of the Self is the moolam of both the ishvara maya and the jiva avidya of the jiva bhava (dream) state. Hence it may also be referred to as mula-avidya of the Self through which the Self appears/projects/imagines as world, jiva etc. 

 

Ø     Again it is the JEEVA who is seeing this Ishwara, jagat and another jeeva, it is the jeeva who is doing the upAsana of the Ishwara (with mAyOpAdhi / sOpadhika / kArya brahma / apara brahma) for the krama mukti and materialistic gains.  In this Ishwara bhAva from the jeeva perspective is as per shAstra Ishwara is not different from mAya or mAya shakti is the natural shakti of the Ishwara to do srushti kArya for the sake of jeeva.  Because in this scenario jeeva has to experience / enjoy (karma phala bhOga) and also elevate himself to the higher standards for this Ishwara provides him the stage called jagat.  And here Ishwara not endowed with mUlAvidyA but he is having the mAyA shakti an an integral part.  Ishwara is sarvajna, sarva shakta, karma phala dAta, karmAdhyaksha and more importantly he is  nitya Shuddha buddha mukta svarUpa and FREE FROM ANY SORT OF AVIDYA ( Ishwara is avidyA vinirmukta).  So Ishwara bhAva as explained in shruti is jnAna, Ishwarya, saMpat etc. and as you say he is with mAya which is jnAna, iccha and kriya shakti.  I don’t think shAstra and bhAshya anywhere enjoined mUlAvidyA to Ishwara to say jeeva is having the avidyA and that avidyA is due to Ishwara’s mUlAvidyA.  Am I missing something here?? Please clarify. 

 

Dream level: jiva has avidya, does karma, etc. Dreamer level: Self alone exists and Self alone manifests jiva-bhava awareness and its limiting adjuncts of vidya and avidya, as well as all namarupa objects. And Self alone decides how to perpetuate the dream based on the self-identifications within that dream. That non-dual Self I am, even though I imagine self in this BMI and not-self as that world 'outside'. 

 

Ø     I am unable to understand how this dream level and dreamer (taijasa) is something different from jaagrat level and waker (Vishwa) both are denoted the adhyAsa only from jeeva’s perspective is it not?? 

 

Third is Maya/Avidya bhava: Brahman in its true 'nature' or paramarthika standpoint is unblemished by duality. Duality, however affirmed, is a case of adhyasa (like imagination). Even Ishvara bhava involves the superimposition of Dreamer-dream duality on the Self. The cause of such adhyasa is Maya=mula-avidya, and the duality that appears in consciousness is deemed only the modification/projection of Maya/Avidya. But note that Maya itself appears as an "existing entity" only in the dream that Maya is said to project on Self. This circularity or infinite regress conundrum reveals to us that Maya and its projection are all mithya, anirvachaniya. And when one says Maya is anirvachaniya, it automatically contradicts statements like "it is a separate existing entity" because it is neither asat nor sat. It has the status akin to illusion or imagination or mirage. Avidya bhava is not meant to emphasize reality of avidya, but to direct attention away from All dualistic identifications, divisions, differentiations (that in jiva-bhava appear as due to ishvara maya or jiva avidya) to the paramarthika advaita satya of Brahman. 

 

Ø     As you know as per my understanding mAya is NOT a synonym to avidyA to draw the above conclusion.  mAya in its manifest (vyAkruta) and unmanifesh (avyAkruta) forms always there in brahman, bhAshyakAra explicitly confirms this in the srushti prakriya.  Where as avidyA is tuccha, jeevAntaHkaraNa Ashrita, so not at all in Ishwara but Ishwara is using the mAyA as upAdhi / shakti to act as a creation in srushti prakriya.  And this parApara prakruti is NOT different from mAya.  Hence mAya cannot be equated with avidyA here. 

 

Fourth is Brahma bhava: Everything is Brahman only. The All is reduced to nama-rupa denotation of Brahman, like ring and necklace of Gold. All duality is brahma-svarupa and when we realize the non-dual Self in all identifications; there is not even room for speaking in terms of avidya vs maya, or doership and causality, because there is only Brahman denoted in (and substratum of) all such word-objects. Their "other" meanings constitute the mithya world of the jiva-bhava. (Since duality is still acknowledged, Brahman identified in this manner is still Ishvara in a higher sense.)

 

Ø     This is called Samyak drushti, sama darshana, Atmaikatva drushti or sarvAtma bhAva please note this sarvAtma bhAva what is called ‘mOksha sthiti’ in shankara bhAshya it is just some vyAvahArika elevated / improvised drushti of jeeva bhAva.  So there is hardly any difference between sarvAtma bhAva and realization of nirguNa/nirvishesha paramArtha svarUpa. 

 

All these have validity in the vyavaharika standpoint only.

 

Ø     Ofcourse all loukika and vaidika vyavahAra-s like jnAni-jnAna, mOksha-bandhana, srushti-srushtikarta etc. are in the realm of duality only.  In parabrahma tattva there is no duality whatsoever…neha nAnAsti kiMchana.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

[putran M]

Namaskaram Bhaskar-ji,

I just want to add some extra thoughts on the first part of your response.

Ø     Again it is the JEEVA who is seeing this Ishwara, jagat and another jeeva, it is the jeeva who is doing the upAsana of the Ishwara (with mAyOpAdhi / sOpadhika / kArya brahma / apara brahma) for the krama mukti and materialistic gains.  In this Ishwara bhAva from the jeeva perspective is as per shAstra Ishwara is not different from mAya or mAya shakti is the natural shakti of the Ishwara to do srushti kArya for the sake of jeeva.  Because in this scenario jeeva has to experience / enjoy (karma phala bhOga) and also elevate himself to the higher standards for this Ishwara provides him the stage called jagat.  And here Ishwara not endowed with mUlAvidyA but he is having the mAyA shakti an an integral part.  Ishwara is sarvajna, sarva shakta, karma phala dAta, karmAdhyaksha and more importantly he is  nitya Shuddha buddha mukta svarUpa and FREE FROM ANY SORT OF AVIDYA ( Ishwara is avidyA vinirmukta).  So Ishwara bhAva as explained in shruti is jnAna, Ishwarya, saMpat etc. and as you say he is with mAya which is jnAna, iccha and kriya shakti.  I don’t think shAstra and bhAshya anywhere enjoined mUlAvidyA to Ishwara to say jeeva is having the avidyA and that avidyA is due to Ishwara’s mUlAvidyA.  Am I missing something here?? Please clarify. 

 

In my reading, you are re- presenting what I had stated as "jiva bhava". The other bhavas are meant to correspond to a deeper incorporation and assimilation of advaita jnana - of how to sublate the perceived duality in Self. 

The "Ishvara" in Ishvara bhava is more general to the ishvara within jiva bhava. How so? The Self is realized as the One who puts on the jiva hat, the jagat mask, and the ishvara crown, and enacts this Play. There is no "jiva does this or has avidya"; it is all only Ishvara appearing "as if" in the context of the Play, as if the karmi jiva and as if the karmaphaladaata ishvara. The non-dual I projecting and reflecting itSelf in the infinity of 'i's of Its projected nama-rupa universe. As Gaudapada puts it, it is this Self (Ishvara) who by His Maya imagines the objects outside (i.e. of jagat) and inside (i.e. jiva's thoughts). This imagination includes self-identification with BMI in the context of the jiva projection.

Ishvara's knowledge is uncreated and eternal, constituting the jnana dimension of Maya; and Creation is the manifest iccha-kriya display of His Knowledge. But, this "Creation" as conceived at the Dreamer level is one level beneath the creation within the dream. The dream of ishvara-jiva-jagat is together the disPlay ("Creation") of Ishvara, except how He forwards the dream is locally driven according to the manifold jiva self-identifications within the dream and the ishvara identification as the Lord in that dream. He assumes the roles and weaves the story. And Ishvara manifest as the Sruthi reminds His BMI identified characters:

 BU 1.4.10: This, the Brahman (self) that is perceived as being in this body, was indeed - this word is emphatic - Brahman. and all, in the beginning, even before realisation. But owing to ignorance it superimposes on itself the notion that it is not Brahman, and that it is not all, and consequently thinks, through mistake, that it is an agent, possessed of activity, the experiencer of its fruits, happy or miserable, and transmigrating. But really it is Brahman different from all the foregoing and is all. Being somehow awakened by a merciful teacher who told it that it was not subject to trans- migration, 'It knew only Itself,' it!! own natural Self, that is, which is free from differentiations superimposed by ignorance.

The point is to realize the dream status of jiva-bhava and allow the Dreamer imagining in each jiva-identification to realize Himself as the All.

Then is Ishvara ignorant? The terms vidya and avidya are with reference to the manifestation (illumination/awareness) of intrinsic knowledge. Ishvara manifests limited or lack of knowledge (ignorance/avidya) in the context of His jiva projection; so when identified as the jiva in the dream, He is ignorant in the sense He manifests ignorance. Likewise when identified as the ishvara in the dream, He has full knowledge. Both are His imagination, and the capacity to imagine both vidya and avidya is unitary - call it Maya or Mula-avidya.  

thollmelukaalkizhu

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Putran prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

I could able to get your point (ofcourse after reading it several times 😊)  but still one thing I am not able to understand is why Ishwara did all these things!!??

If Ishwara indulges in activity in imagining the jeeva, jagat etc. if there is some benefit, otherwise it does not. I would ask for what benefit did Ishwara imagined both the jeeva (with different enjoyment / suffering / capability) and the world? If it is told ‘for its own satisfaction’ it would imply that without the imagination of jeeva and world the Ishwara was suffering from lackness and he was dissatisfied before imagining the jeeva & jagat.  No need to say this goes against the scriptural contention that Ishwara is nityAnanda svarUpa and AptakAma that is Self- satisfied. Suppose it is argued ‘it has just acted without any reason’, it

would mean that Ishwara is some sort of crazyman 😊 because only a crazy fellow mischievously  will act without any purpose. This would again go against Ishwara is  being omniscient, omnipotent etc.  So, in either way, Ishwara cannot be the imaginer of jeeva and jagat.  And more importantly we cannot answer this from jeeva’s perspective because jeeva bhAva itself is the manifestation of Ishwara!!.  Anyway as I shared my understanding earlier it is only for the jeeva’s sake all these things have been introduced and clarified in scriptures.  The Ishwara srushti is for the sake of jeeva who has to experience his karma and get rid of his avidyA….There is no vidyAvidya vyavahAra in brahman.  And when brahman is considered as Ishwara he is srushti karta, he does the creation as per the karma accumulated by jeeva.  And he is, for the jagat, the upAdAna, nimitta kAraNa and also antaryaami.  There are plenty of shruti references for this.  And my understanding is strictly within this.

 

And with regard to your references from bru.bhAshya, kArika I hope I have already clarified how I read these references to come to the vedAntic conclusion that :

 

1. Brahman/Ishwara does not acquire avidyA and become jeeva OR imagines both jeeva and jagat BUT
2. Jeeva should get rid of his avidyA and realize his svarUpa.  All efforts of shruti, smruti and yukti in vedAnta only aimed towards this goal. 

[putran M]

Namaskaram Bhaskar-ji,

As I said before, your strict understanding on ishvara falls within jiva bhava for me. The term Ishvara that I use and that I understand in the Mandukya karika verses refers to the non-dual Self. He is the only Seer and all seen is His imagination. For the Self imagining "i am jiva" and that there is causality and change within its world of objects, the directive is to sublate the perceived duality and causality in the unitary Self (Ishvara) and His unitary causal power Maya. There is no "jiva does this but ishvara does that"; both jiva and ishvara and their doing this or that - all that is imagination of the non-dual Ishvara - and therefore He, the Self, I am the All.

I could able to get your point (ofcourse after reading it several times 😊)  but still one thing I am not able to understand is why Ishwara did all these things!!??

Perspective 1:

I would say: kaarunya in jiva-bhava, lila in Ishvara bhava, anirvachaniya in Maya/Avidya bhava, question does not apply in Brahma bhava.

"All Creation is the sport of my mad Mother Kali"

"Rama walks and Dharma follows"

The question "Why?" is a real matter in jiva-bhava that posits duality in the Self, and we have the vyavaharika answers corresponding to the apparent relations between ishvara, jiva, jagat. 

In Ishvara bhava, there is no other Seer than Him and the seen of every variety is His imagination. Why or why not? His sweet will. His decision manifests/appears as our laws and causality, our vidya and avidya, "whys" and "why nots". We can't superimpose the dream back onto Him and try to bind Him to our rhyme and reason.

Perspective 2:

Ishvara (Self/Consciousness) projects and identifies as objects and individual selves and as ishvara the Lord. Ishvara displays partial knowledge or ignorance (avidya) in His jiva manifestation, and omniscience in His ishvara manifestation. And He perpetuates the dream further based on His manifestations and self-identifications in the dream. 

Keeping this perspective intact, you can decide whether you want to say Ishvara "has avidya" or not. For me, the fundamental focus is the non-duality of Self and that is how I understand the karikas and BU verse. If we associate any sort of causality in Him (as He is the cause for 'Creation'), then that Power (Maya=mula-avidya) is unitary and responsible for the jagat outside and jagats arising 'in jiva mind'. Or, we have to shift to Maya/Avidya bhava, where Maya=Avidya is the cause for the superimposition (which includes the notion that Brahman is subject to avidya) but it is anirvachaniya ultimately. In Brahma bhava, there is no acknowledgment of causality in the dream for the All is pointer of nirguna Brahman and we don't dwell on the duality. If you start asking on "what about ring vs bangle?", you have compromised this bhava and your answers are in the other bhavas.

thollmelukaalkizhu

--
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/AM7PR06MB6625DFDCFF49BFF71B3DE85484AC2%40AM7PR06MB6625.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[putran M]

If we associate any sort of causality in Him (as He is the cause for 'Creation'), then that Power (Maya=mula-avidya) is unitary and responsible for the jagat outside and jagats arising 'in jiva mind'.

read "His Power", in this bhava. 

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

Some more thoughts, based on what I read and can connect logically.

Regarding Avidya:

Avidya is regarded as a "positive entity" that causes the avarana and vikshepa onto Brahman. The dualities of perception are reduced to a case of superimposition (illusion) by Avidya; and Avidya as the cause is itself only coeval to the vyavaharika standpoint where this duality is somehow posited. It is asat in the paramarthika standpoint of Brahman.

An analogy that may be appropriate is that of dispersed clouds blocking our vision of the blue sky thereby superimposing various shapes onto the sky (through the holes in the clouds). These shapes are in no way intrinsic to the sky. The clouds themselves cannot be said to be the sky nor are they "not sky".

Regarding Maya (in Ishvara bhava):

Brahman as Ishvara is conceived as having a two-dimensional nature: existence and activity (imagination). 

As Existence, He is non-dual; and as Activity, He projects duality. 

Maya then can be defined in three ways:

1. The denotation of Brahman through the lens of Activity is Maya. 

2. Maya denotes the Activity dimension and the denotation of Brahman having this dual nature of Sat+Maya is Ishvara.

3. Maya denotes the intrinsic shakti (power of imagination) of Brahman through which He appears to act.

Let us take up the third paradigm which is typical. There are some significant similarity and difference between Maya and Avidya.

Maya like Avidya is held to be directly responsible for both avarana and vikshepa. But Maya has a three-fold nature: it is the jnana-iccha-kriya shakti of Ishvara. Both avarana and vikshepa are the iccha-kriya manifestations of the jnana of Ishvara. 

Thus, though the world has the status of being His imagination (hence not absolutely real), it is not absolutely unreal either being a part of His eternal knowledge. The vikshepa in particular is regarded as a consequence of illumination and manifestation rather than the veiling and superimposition.

In the cloud-sky analogy, the Sky now manifests the clouds through its intrinsic potency and hence the shapes etc. are neither a part of Sky nor apart from Sky.

Avidya bhava affirms an implicit duality between two positive entities, Brahman and Avidya, where the latter is accepted as anirvachaniya even within the paradigm (for Brahman alone is satya). Ishvara bhava affirms an aspectival duality in Brahman, as existence (Dreamer) and activity (dream) - the cause of activity, Maya, and its effect, the world, are accepted as if real (as His knowledge and capacity) within the vyavaharika paradigm, but ultimately are anirvachaniya in light of the paramarthika satya of Brahman. It is in the eventual anirvachaniyatvam of the causal "entity" in both these paradigms (Avidya in Avidya bhava and Maya in Ishvara bhava) that their non-difference is concluded upon.

thollmelukaalkizhu

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

I know the thread may continue, but I compiled and lightly edited my writing here, and sent to my family-friend group. See attached file.

thollmelukaalkizhu

[putran M]

I know the thread may continue, but I compiled and lightly edited my writing here, and sent to my family-friend group. See attached file.

Reattaching; made a small couple of changes on "brahma bhava". There is an acknowledgment (at least I present this position) of a duality of namarupa identifiers though they are all pointers of Brahman. In the earlier file, I had indicated this at one place and not so in another; so made them consistent now.

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Putran prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

• I am afraid we both are sticking to our perspective and repeatedly explaining the Ishwara bhAva which is intermediate state of Chaitanya between brahman and jeeva.  I want to once again reiterate that in shAstra Ishwara never ever showed/depicted as having avidyA ( yes in araMbhaNAdhikaraNa IshvarOpAdhi etc. termed as avidyA Kalpita that is entirely under the different context).  On the other hand Ishwara as per shAstra is always avidyA vinirmukta.  The Ishwara here in shAstra though not the highest (para) brahman he is far superior to jeeva.  He (ishwara) is sarvajna, sarvashakta in that sense he is greater than and definitely different from the jeeva, the creator of Jagat here is omniscient, omnipotent and of Ever-Pure-Free-Divine Nature (nitya Shuddha buddha mukta) and the tiny jeeva is not so. Please refer sUtra adhikaM tu bheda nirdeshanaat in Sri SSS’s Kanna book the sUtra reference is 2.1.22.  And this Ishwara like Lord in geeta is for ever free from avidyA.  Refer sUtra bhAshya 3.2.9.  For further clarification and difference between Ishwara - mAya and jeeva-avidyA we can refer the dialogues between the lord and Arjuna.  You can have more details of this in geeta bhAshya 4-5 bahUnime vyatitaani verse.  So with all these superior concepts of Ishwara only I am saying kArika is talking about jeeva bhAva though in the language of shAstra jeeva is nothing but brahman it is saying brahman / Ishwara himself imagines world and other jeeva as well.  Ishwara cannot at any circumstances comes under the influence of avidyA and does this creation it is coz. of the simple fact that bhagavAn is always endowed with jnAna, Ishwarya, shakti, bala, veerya and tejas and always absolutely free from avidyA. 
•  I think with this I shall stop.  If I come across anything specific about kArika references with regard to usage of brahman / Ishwara in place of jeeva, I shall come back with more explanation ofcourse that explanation first should convince me 😊

[putran M]

Namaskaram Bhaskar-ji,

That is fine. We've both said our bit for this round. I won't presently concede my understanding of the other "bhavas" - for ex, that the Mandukya verses I pointed out are teaching what I call "Ishvara bhava" has always appeared quite starkly clear to me.  

However, perhaps my use of word Ishvara as denotation of Self in a higher sense, in these other 'bhavas' - that may be non-standard or not distinguished when taught in shastras. Likewise, of course, it is my decision in this thread for the sake of expressing and conveying understanding that I call these "bhavas". I am sure "Brahma bhava" is not found in Sruthi or bhashya. So, if such novel usage is a problem for you, then you can replace as possible or simply disagree on that basis. I am going to keep with them for now unless I find consensus from others that my usage of word Ishvara in such "higher sense" is deeply flawed, and misleading. But other scholars have not commented. As of now I only have received a positive response, perhaps not a scholar, in private for my writings or explanation.  Given that there is not much scrutiny outside yourself, and you are yourself controversial, I don't feel compelled to change my use of "Ishvara" and definitely not the understanding I am trying to convey through such usage. 

thollmelukaalkizhu

--

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/AM7PR06MB66253117F097CB5F5F788F9084AA2%40AM7PR06MB6625.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram Bhaskar-ji,

•  The Ishwara here in shAstra though not the highest (para) brahman he is far superior to jeeva.  He (ishwara) is sarvajna, sarvashakta in that sense he is greater than and definitely different from the jeeva, the creator of Jagat here is omniscient, omnipotent and of Ever-Pure-Free-Divine Nature (nitya Shuddha buddha mukta) and the tiny jeeva is not so.

Using Screen-movie analogy:

I am talking about the Screen projecting the movie and all its characters within. You are talking about the Screen as it appears in the context of the movie, to its characters, relative to them. 

If Rajini (suppose) double-acts as Baasha and villain, we can compare Baasha and villain; but if we think Rajini is surely stronger than villain, it is gibberish because Rajini is satya and Baasha & villain are mithya. I am talking about Rajini the Actor playing both the roles; you are talking about Baasha relative to the villain.

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

• Please refer sUtra adhikaM tu bheda nirdeshanaat in Sri SSS’s Kanna book the sUtra reference is 2.1.22.  And this Ishwara like Lord in geeta is for ever free from avidyA.  Refer sUtra bhAshya 3.2.9.  For further clarification and difference between Ishwara - mAya and jeeva-avidyA we can refer the dialogues between the lord and Arjuna.  You can have more details of this in geeta bhAshya 4-5 bahUnime vyatitaani verse.  So with all these superior concepts of Ishwara only I am saying kArika is talking about jeeva bhAva though in the language of shAstra jeeva is nothing but brahman it is saying brahman / Ishwara himself imagines world and other jeeva as well.  Ishwara cannot at any circumstances comes under the influence of avidyA and does this creation it is coz. of the simple fact that bhagavAn is always endowed with jnAna, Ishwarya, shakti, bala, veerya and tejas and always absolutely free from avidyA. 
•  I think with this I shall stop.  If I come across anything specific about kArika references with regard to usage of brahman / Ishwara in place of jeeva, I shall come back with more explanation ofcourse that explanation first should convince me 😊

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

--

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/AM7PR06MB66253117F097CB5F5F788F9084AA2%40AM7PR06MB6625.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

 

If Rajini (suppose) double-acts as Baasha and villain, we can compare Baasha and villain; but if we think Rajini is surely stronger than villain, it is gibberish because Rajini is satya and Baasha & villain are mithya. I am talking about Rajini the Actor playing both the roles; you are talking about Baasha relative to the villain.

The Rajini analogy, I want to say is not perfect, so cannot be completely equated with Ishvara bhava. The post was made in haste and I can't spend requisite time to rethink its limitations. The Rajini analogy seems good for showing satya vs mithya and the reduction of all causality to Ishvara the unitary Self projecting All; but perhaps misleading (one-sided) on the question of avidya vs vidya in Ishvara. Definitely we can agree that ishvara in jiva bhava has no avidya, in the sense of lacking knowledge. How to understand Ishvara in Ishvara bhava and whether the question of avidya applies there and how - are higher order questions. I don't think the Rajini analogy serves that purpose well because Rajini certain knows both the roles and is ever mentally conscious/aware of playing them. (Anyway sorry if this causes more confusion and another round of back and forth for this topic. Will try to withdraw for now.)

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

Definitely we can agree that ishvara in jiva bhava has no avidya, in the sense of lacking knowledge.

This is a general question after I re-read my sentence above. 

Does ishvara already know what the jiva will do? The jiva does karma by exercising its shakti - though impelled by avidya and vasanas. And ishvara gives karmaphala etc. and provides the jiva at each turn the opportunity to choose sreyas over preyas. But we don't think ishvara knows what this jiva will choose; Creation in the flow of its manifestation/cognition is not entirely predetermined. 

If this is the case, then ishvara (in jiva bhava) already has avidya (and is not omniscient) with regard to the future!! What do the shastras say about how we should understand ishvara's omniscience here?

thollmelukaalkizhu

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Putran prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Does ishvara already know what the jiva will do?

 

• When Ishwara is ‘sarvajna’ (he is the knower of anything and everything hence he is omniscient) do we have any doubt like this!! 

 

 

The jiva does karma by exercising its shakti - though impelled by avidya and vasanas. And ishvara gives karmaphala etc. and provides the jiva at each turn the opportunity to choose sreyas over preyas. But we don't think ishvara knows what this jiva will choose;

 

• Again he knows everything, he knows what is destined for the particular jeeva.  He just does not interfere with it.  He just bestows the karma phala, he neither creates karma nor kartrutva to the jeeva.  Na katrutvam na karmANi lOkasya srujati prabhuH.  Jeeva chooses rather Ishwara guides jeeva’s destiny as per jeeva’s respective karma phala.  Though he is all powerful (sarvashakta) the lord / ruler of the jagat, he is the bestower of blessings, he is the adorable god, he is the krama mukti dAta when he is sincerely proficiated, he does not on his own deliberately manipulate the destiny of jeeva.  It is jeeva’s karma phala / saMskAra that would decide what he is going to do and what he is going to get, Ishwara just distribute it impartially. 

 

Creation in the flow of its manifestation/cognition is not entirely predetermined. 

 

Ø     dhAta yathA pUrvamakalpayatu, he would definitely have the ‘idea’ of previous srushti, previous kalpa’s jeeva-s and their respective account of pApa-puNya, accordingly for the sake of these jeeva-s he would set the stage called jagat (the creation of jagat) on which jeeva experiences the karma phala and does the sAdhana for the Shreyas. 

 

If this is the case, then ishvara (in jiva bhava) already has avidya (and is not omniscient) with regard to the future!!

 

• I am really failed to understand the concept of ‘this type of Ishwara’ in shAstra.  Perhaps you can provide me the relevant references from scriptures.  As long as the universe is real and aloof from jeeva, Ishwara is the sarvajna, sarvashakta, deva devottama (the supreme godhead in ISKCON language) and in a sense he is the biggest wave in the infinite ocean of pure consciousness. Here Ishwara cannot have the jeeva bhAva because jeeva bhAva is due to avidyA as upAdhi, but Ishwara’s Ishwaratva or Ishatva is coz. of his shakti i.e. mAya.  And to describe the creation vedAnta shAstra uses the word ‘mAya’ which is NOT essentially different from brahman.  And in this creation scenario only for the dharma rakshaNa, dushta shikshaNa, shishta paripAla etc. takes place and will be taken care by unique manifestation of the Ishwara like rAma, Krishna etc. No way we can attribute jeeva bhAva to this Ishwara who is eternally sarvajna and sarvashakta.

 

What do the shastras say about how we should understand ishvara's omniscience here?

 

Ø     It is very clearly explained as long as universe is explained as a creation originated from brahman etc.  the Ishwara is the creator, sustainer and destroyer of this universe.  He is the mOksha dAta to sAdhaka jeeva.  He is the lord of all, all powerful.  When sAdhaka realizes that he is shivOhaM, he is the brahman then Ishwaratva of Ishwara merges in this sarvAtma bhAva or Atmaikatva vijnAna and no question of jeeva, jagat and Ishwara bheda…what is there is ONE and ONLY homogenous entity i.e. nirvikAri, nirvishesha brahman.  However Ishwara/brahman’s omniscience etc. does not get affected by this oneness coz. for that ONLY one without second pure consciousness the sarvajnatva, sarvashaktitva etc. are very intrinsic nature (svabhAva). 

[Bhaskar YR]

Sri Putran prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Further to my previous mail, you can refer to sUtra bhAshya 1-1-5 where bhAshyakAra particularly talks about Ishwara’s sarvajnatva.  Here he explains : it is a self-contradiction to maintain that one who possesses eternal consciousness capable of throwing light on everything, is not omniscient.  If his knowledge were impermanent He could know things sometimes and could not know at other times, and consequently it would follow that He may not be omniscient.  This defect is inconceivable in case His consciousness is eternal.  And in the shewaashwatara up. It is clearly said that the knowledge, the strength and the act is His (Ishwara’s) very nature.  By seeing all these explanations by shruti and bhAshyakAra one can get the answers to queries like : if brahman alone is really real and without second, what is the need to call him sarvajna, sarvashakta etc. since there is no act of knowing on the part of one and only brahman what is the need to say he is omniscient??  Etc. etc.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

BHASKAR YR

 

From: 'Bhaskar YR' via advaitin <adva...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2024 9:22 AM
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [advaitin] Four bhavas that direct to Advaita

 

Warning

This email comes from outside of Hitachi Energy. Make sure you verify the sender before clicking any links or downloading/opening attachments. If this email looks suspicious, report it by clicking 'Report Phishing' button in Outlook. See the SecureWay group in Yammer for more security information.

--

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/AM7PR06MB662544258CC26176410FB4E284AB2%40AM7PR06MB6625.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Putran prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

That is fine. We've both said our bit for this round. I won't presently concede my understanding of the other "bhavas" - for ex, that the Mandukya verses I pointed out are teaching what I call "Ishvara bhava" has always appeared quite starkly clear to me.  

 

Ø     Yes, if we go by the plain meaning of these kArikA-s then definitely what is quite starkly clear to you clear to all as well.  But as I said as per my understanding shAstra at all places talks about jeeva’s avidyA, Ishwara’s kAruNya and brahma jnAna and it never talks about Ishwara’s jeeva bhAva, brahman in Ishwara bhAva having avidyA etc.  Hence I am finding it difficult to literally understand these kArika-s reference to brahman and brahman deluding himself etc.  Anyway, I have yet to check Sri SSS’s mAndUkya kArika, Rahasya vivrutti, gaudapAda hrudaya etc.  Perhaps referring these works would throw more light on what has been intended in these texts.  Ofcourse, this is for my own understanding not necessarily you should agree with it 😊

 

However, perhaps my use of word Ishvara as denotation of Self in a higher sense, in these other 'bhavas' - that may be non-standard or not distinguished when taught in shastras.

 

• But you are saying shAstra (kArika and br.up. bhashya here in this context) mentioned clearly about it.  So as per your claim you have already provided the shAstric reference to your understanding.  And I have explained why it could not be so as per my understanding of Ishwara tattva in Advaita vedAnta. 

 

Likewise, of course, it is my decision in this thread for the sake of expressing and conveying understanding that I call these "bhavas".

 

• Ofcourse prabhuji you are welcome to do that.  Infact introduction of these different bhAva-s and perspectives would open up new avenues to understand shAstra and bhAshya vAkya-s in different contexts provided logically it is accepted based on shruti, yukti and anubhava. 

 

I am sure "Brahma bhava" is not found in Sruthi or bhashya.

 

• In brahma bhAva or in pAramArthika satya there is nothing that can be called ‘second’…neha nAnAsti kiMchana, evamevAdviteeyaM says shAstra.

 

So, if such novel usage is a problem for you, then you can replace as possible or simply disagree on that basis. I am going to keep with them for now unless I find consensus from others that my usage of word Ishvara in such "higher sense" is deeply flawed, and misleading. But other scholars have not commented. As of now I only have received a positive response, perhaps not a scholar, in private for my writings or explanation. 

 

• My praNAms to you prabhuji. 

 

Given that there is not much scrutiny outside yourself, and you are yourself controversial,

 

• 😊 😊 I accept your remarks on me prabhuji after all I am a petty shop owner here competing with big big MNCs 😊

 

I don't feel compelled to change my use of "Ishvara" and definitely not the understanding I am trying to convey through such usage. 

 

Ø     You are welcome to have your opinion prabhuji. 

[putran M]

Namaskaram Bhaskar-ji,

Does ishvara already know what the jiva will do?

 

• When Ishwara is ‘sarvajna’ (he is the knower of anything and everything hence he is omniscient) do we have any doubt like this!! 

 

Of course we should have this doubt. How can you not? If ishvara knows what you are going to do, that means you are a mere robot. Then there is no point in all this silly talk of karma and karmaphala and what you should do to get moksha. When you engage in talk of that "omniscient Ishvara", cease and desist any further talk of jiva and avidya and everything in between. It is all pre-written stuff in His knowledge already and even He is a robot who imagines exactly a pre-written script. The only way to be logical about this is that He is everywhere and you are merely His projection/imagination and we can't really tell the difference between His exercising free-will or enacting His pre-written Play - it gets into anirvachaniya realm. That is getting into what I called Ishvara bhava and I keep feeling that you are mixing jiva bhava and Ishvara bhava.

• Again he knows everything, he knows what is destined for the particular jeeva.  He just does not interfere with it.  He just bestows the karma phala, he neither creates karma nor kartrutva to the jeeva.  Na katrutvam na karmANi lOkasya srujati prabhuH.  Jeeva chooses rather Ishwara guides jeeva’s destiny as per jeeva’s respective karma phala.  Though he is all powerful (sarvashakta) the lord / ruler of the jagat, he is the bestower of blessings, he is the adorable god, he is the krama mukti dAta when he is sincerely proficiated, he does not on his own deliberately manipulate the destiny of jeeva.  It is jeeva’s karma phala / saMskAra that would decide what he is going to do and what he is going to get, Ishwara just distribute it impartially. 

See, this is word play where you are pushing under the rug the question whether ishvara knows what jiva will do. You are the doer of karma which obtains karmaphala. karmaphala cannot decide. It is jada. You are the chaitanya vastu with the jnana-iccha-kriya shakti. You decide between sreyas and preyas and control the course of your destiny. You may be impelled by the momentum of the past and the results that follow, but you are not a robot whose actions are completely controlled by an ishvara who is "completely different" from you. That ishvara does not know (yes He has avidya of) what you will do, even if He knows what you must experience for what you have done and where your destiny will gravitate towards. Once you desire, commit and act, He will turn the universe accordingly so you get the phala somehow or other.

If you don't agree to this, that means there is only Ishvara - who imagines it all - and no question of you different from Him, being tiny with avidya while He is great with no avidya. Can't have it both ways.

 

 

Creation in the flow of its manifestation/cognition is not entirely predetermined. 

 

Ø     dhAta yathA pUrvamakalpayatu, he would definitely have the ‘idea’ of previous srushti, previous kalpa’s jeeva-s and their respective account of pApa-puNya, accordingly for the sake of these jeeva-s he would set the stage called jagat (the creation of jagat) on which jeeva experiences the karma phala and does the sAdhana for the Shreyas. 

 

'idea'?? Is that my point? Him having an idea of your destiny or clarity about the karmaphala for your papa-punya does not mean He is controlling your present decisions or knowing exactly what you will do now. He has avidya about your karma now, no matter how great an idea He has of what you are likely to do. You the chaitanya vastu bear the responsibility for that and not His crystal ball in which all is known. 

 

If this is the case, then ishvara (in jiva bhava) already has avidya (and is not omniscient) with regard to the future!!

 

• I am really failed to understand the concept of ‘this type of Ishwara’ in shAstra. 

I've already explained. That type of ishvara is the logical fallout of jiva bhava. Its nothing wrong - we have to interpret omniscience in the appropriate manner - so I asked how?; but the sarvajna of ishvara as you initially claimed cannot co-exist with an equally real jiva who is the doer of karma. Such an all-encompassing sarvajna can only belong to the unitary Ishvara in whom jiva-bhava is entirely imagination/mithya.

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

• Perhaps you can provide me the relevant references from scriptures.  As long as the universe is real and aloof from jeeva, Ishwara is the sarvajna, sarvashakta, deva devottama (the supreme godhead in ISKCON language) and in a sense he is the biggest wave in the infinite ocean of pure consciousness. Here Ishwara cannot have the jeeva bhAva because jeeva bhAva is due to avidyA as upAdhi, but Ishwara’s Ishwaratva or Ishatva is coz. of his shakti i.e. mAya.  And to describe the creation vedAnta shAstra uses the word ‘mAya’ which is NOT essentially different from brahman.  And in this creation scenario only for the dharma rakshaNa, dushta shikshaNa, shishta paripAla etc. takes place and will be taken care by unique manifestation of the Ishwara like rAma, Krishna etc. No way we can attribute jeeva bhAva to this Ishwara who is eternally sarvajna and sarvashakta.

 

What do the shastras say about how we should understand ishvara's omniscience here?

 

Ø     It is very clearly explained as long as universe is explained as a creation originated from brahman etc.  the Ishwara is the creator, sustainer and destroyer of this universe.  He is the mOksha dAta to sAdhaka jeeva.  He is the lord of all, all powerful.  When sAdhaka realizes that he is shivOhaM, he is the brahman then Ishwaratva of Ishwara merges in this sarvAtma bhAva or Atmaikatva vijnAna and no question of jeeva, jagat and Ishwara bheda…what is there is ONE and ONLY homogenous entity i.e. nirvikAri, nirvishesha brahman.  However Ishwara/brahman’s omniscience etc. does not get affected by this oneness coz. for that ONLY one without second pure consciousness the sarvajnatva, sarvashaktitva etc. are very intrinsic nature (svabhAva). 

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

--

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/AM7PR06MB662544258CC26176410FB4E284AB2%40AM7PR06MB6625.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram Bhaskar-ji,

Further to my previous mail, you can refer to sUtra bhAshya 1-1-5 where bhAshyakAra particularly talks about Ishwara’s sarvajnatva.  Here he explains : it is a self-contradiction to maintain that one who possesses eternal consciousness capable of throwing light on everything, is not omniscient.  If his knowledge were impermanent He could know things sometimes and could not know at other times, and consequently it would follow that He may not be omniscient.  This defect is inconceivable in case His consciousness is eternal.  And in the shewaashwatara up. It is clearly said that the knowledge, the strength and the act is His (Ishwara’s) very nature.  By seeing all these explanations by shruti and bhAshyakAra one can get the answers to queries like : if brahman alone is really real and without second, what is the need to call him sarvajna, sarvashakta etc. since there is no act of knowing on the part of one and only brahman what is the need to say he is omniscient??  Etc. etc.

Ok then. I am afraid it is you who uses those terms frequently and distinguishes jiva from ishvara, avidya from maya, tiny and great, on their basis. Then just as easily you shift to another standpoint where He is the All, and ask why call Him omniscient at all - it is redundant.

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB66251D0167B0246D2D9D4D1784AB2%40AM7PR06MB6625.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Putran prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

I am not asking the question OTOH I am saying the answer we can get to the queries like this.  Anyway, sorry, I am failed to make you understand my perspective.  I will give it up prabhuji.  And you can wait for some others (who you can accommodate as scholars) who can talk more about Ishwara’s alpajnatva, his avidyA bhAva, his not knowing defect  etc.  as per your perspective. 

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

  By seeing all these explanations by shruti and bhAshyakAra one can get the answers to queries like : if brahman alone is really real and without second, what is the need to call him sarvajna, sarvashakta etc. since there is no act of knowing on the part of one and only brahman what is the need to say he is omniscient??  Etc. etc.

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

 

You the chaitanya vastu bear the responsibility for that and not His crystal ball in which all is known. 

It is implied as "You the chaitanya vastu identified with this subtle body" so as to distinguish the jiva from others including ishvara. In this vyavaharika standpoint, this jiva with avidya is different from that ishvara with maya (for their limiting adjuncts are different), and what the chaitanya+shakti (Ishvara) reflected in its projected jiva BMI decides and enacts is distinguished from Its decisions, action and role as ishvara. And so long as these distinctions (that posit a duality) between ishvara and jiva are touted about (jiva has avidya, ishvara has not), one has to also confront the sort of question that I posed and understand ishvara's sarvajna within that framework. Naturally, the point of this thread is that jiva bhava which leads to such conundrum may give way to Ishvara bhava etc. which aid the transition to advaita tattva.

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

[putran M]

Namaskaram Bhaskar-ji,

My mind started wondering yesterday if I was rude not to respond to your final mail.

So, just to finish in good terms, thanks for your efforts to engage from your side. I may add further to the thread but the intention is not to challenge you even if what I say seems opposed to your perspective.

thollmelukaalkizhu 

--

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/AM7PR06MB66252FA1744DF3A17CF318F984AB2%40AM7PR06MB6625.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Putran prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Thanks for your words, infact I myself not sure whether I have conveyed my views correctly in this thread.  Anyway, yesterday I was looking at Sri SSS’s explanation in gaudapaada hrudaya (a Kannada work on kArikaa and bhAshya) with regard to brahmAshrita avidyA and jeevaashrita avidyA particularly in these kArikA verses.  I think he is explaining these verses entirely from a different perspective.  Though he brings both perspectives i.e. brahmAshrita and jeevaashrita avidyA, (BTW explanation from the perspective i.e. Ishwara in jeeva bhAva is quite conspicuous by its absence) and according to him these verses not definitely meant for deciding the locus of avidyA!!.  I shall share more details on this if possible on coming Monday. 

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

BHASKAR YR

 

From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of putran M
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2024 4:59 PM
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [advaitin] Four bhavas that direct to Advaita

 

Warning

This email comes from outside of Hitachi Energy. Make sure you verify the sender before clicking any links or downloading/opening attachments. If this email looks suspicious, report it by clicking 'Report Phishing' button in Outlook. See the SecureWay group in Yammer for more security information.

Namaskaram Bhaskar-ji,

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-pMo7EBzPvufdWMr3JprtaQC-YxaPGNqAgthh1w%3D7_GDQ%40mail.gmail.com.