Guest guest Posted November 23, 2005 Report Share Posted November 23, 2005 praNAms Hare Krishna After seeing somany mails about differences between jIva-Ishvara (that too *eternal* differences!!!) in advaita & jIva's identity with brahman etc. etc. I would like to present my thoughts / queries on it. As we all know, according to advaita, the paramAtman should be recognized as jIva's own self. I've seen this doctrine leads to lot of confusion among advaitins & force us to think that in advaita, process is recognition of the identity of the individual self (jIva) with that of brahman or absolute reality. No..it is not the teaching of identity of the puny jIva and the omniscient & omnipotent Ishvara...Here two fundamental questions arises : (a) is it the jIva who identifies *himself* with brahman & realizes he/she & brahman are one & the same (like pot space identifying its *space* (ghtAkAsha) with outer space (mahAkAsha) OR (b) is it brahman alone is the ONLY reality nothing else?? If it is (a) (i.e. jIva & his identification that he is brahman), then I think we have to accept anEka jIva vAda & their different types of antaHkaraNa upAdhi-s & their ultimate realizations (one after another!!!). As said earlier, shankara in sUtra bhAshya accepts nAnA jIvatva vAda while talking about bhOkta-s & yEka jIva vAda while talking about hiraNya garbha. Here *bhOkta* denotes individual soul which has been taken from the standpoint of various antaHkaraNa upAdhi-s as said above. If we really accepts *individual consciousness* part of jIvAtma & its subsequent *identification* with paramAtman, then we are forced to accept nAnA jIvatva (individual consciousness) & their achievement of brahma jnAna etc. in the liberation process & eternal difference between jIva & Ishwara... shankara answers this question and quotes sUtrakAra (bAdarAyaNa) who has recommended the contemplation on the mutual identity of jIva & Ishvara in their transcedental aspect..(shankara quotes some minor shruti-s also here to justify his claims). He says, we do not say that Ishwara is a tranmigratory being but shruti intended to teach the divine nature of jIva by negating his apparent transmigratory nature. And he concludes as siddhAnta here that gods characteristics such as being free from sins are real and unaffected while the opposite nature of the other (i.e. jIva's trasmigratory nature etc.) is false. Here established *reality* of Ishwara is just to negate the transmigratory nature of socalled jIva..but not to hold *Ishvaratva* as an *absolute* reality. If it is (b) i.e. brahman alone is ONE & ONLY reality considering jIvahood itself is a false appearance due to avidyA then I dont think there is any need of accepting anEka jIvatva & their liberation & identification with brahman etc. etc. Infact, IMHO, this is (b) what shankara's stand on individual jIvAtman & absolute non-dual nature of paramAtman. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 23, 2005 Report Share Posted November 23, 2005 bhaskar.yr wrote: praNAms Hare Krishna If it is (b) i.e. brahman alone is ONE & ONLY reality considering jIvahood itself is a false appearance due to avidyA then I dont think there is any need of accepting anEka jIvatva & their liberation & identification with brahman etc. etc. Infact, IMHO, this is (b) what shankara's stand on individual jIvAtman & absolute non-dual nature of paramAtman. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Yes, ultimaltely it amounts only to eka-jiva vada theory, which has metaphysical consummation. The dream analogy of the dreamed objects not constituting any reality other than the dreamer, is a definite pointer towards the eka-jiva vida theory. The other systems have to build up heavy theories to explain the multiplicity of existence, taking causation as a valid standpoint, which leads to what is known as, 'Anavastha Dhosha', the infinite regress, it logically being impossible to arrive at the starting point of existence. Sankarraman Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 23, 2005 Report Share Posted November 23, 2005 Yes, ultimaltely it amounts only to eka-jiva vada theory, which has metaphysical consummation. praNAms Hare krishna I'd like to read it as *yEkamEvAdvitIya Atma* instead of yEka jIva....coz. the word jIva implies something limited by upAdhi-s!! shankara does not accept any conscious entity other than brahman which can be labelled as *jIva*. While commenting on *who awakes from sushupti?? in sUtra *sa yEva tu karmAnusmruti shabda vidhibhyaH* shankara says, it is pure being (brahman) along that is spoken of as a jIva owning to connection with a conditioning associate. This being so, we talk of one particular jIva, *so long as* bondage continues to one upAdhi (conditioning/limited adjunct). but in case of bondage continuing to attach itself to another upAdhi, *the talk of another jIva becomes necessary*. As we can see, shankara here samashti & vyashti views to say yEka & nAna jIva vAda. Elsewhere shankara clears his stand further by saying " In the supreme Atman, which is ever pure, ever conscious and ever free in nature...the *jIva bhAva* has been conjured up which is drastically opposed to Atman's real nature..just lika as a surface and dirt attributed to mahAkAsha (tala malinatvAdi parakalpitaM). Yes, as you said, the various types of jIva-s exist in this world only in waking point of view and real only in empirical view point. when the three states witnessed from the comprehensive (samyag drushti) view point, it reveals the fact that ONE & ONLY Atman exists. Nothing whatsoever exists second to or apart from him...neither Ishwara nor jIva exist apart from THAT. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 25, 2005 Report Share Posted November 25, 2005 bhaskar.yr wrote: Yes, ultimaltely it amounts only to eka-jiva vada theory, which has metaphysical consummation. praNAms Hare krishna I'd like to read it as *yEkamEvAdvitIya Atma* instead of yEka jIva....coz. the word jIva implies something limited by upAdhi-s!! Sankarraman: I resonate with your view. The word jiva is only meant from verbal point of view, the truth of this being relatable to the Atman only. The Atman has no concern about these theories. It is only the prdicament of the jiva. There is a beautiful line in the poem Savitri of Aurobindo, which I may be permitted to quote. " Life has no lasting issues; death brings no final release. Indifferent Eternity watches Time." with warm regards Sankarraman Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.