Maya and Avidya - vyasti/samasthi

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " pranipatachaitanya "

<pranipatachaitanya wrote:

>

> b. Isvara and Jiva

> The vyasti abhimani of sthula, sukshma and karana is known as visva,

> taijasa and prajna and

> The samasthi abhimani is known as virat; hiranyagarbha and isvara.

> The vyasti who feels because of his abhimana in successive avasthas

> as visva, taijasa and prajna is known as jiva and samasthi is known

> as Isvara.

> d. Sat karya vada

> This does not mean we propound sat karana

> vada. While refuting satkarya vada otherwise known as parinama vada

> which says all are modifications and the effect existed in the cause;

> for refuting which we ask if effect existed already; why to produce ;

> what prevented it from existing always?

>

 

 

Namaskarams Sri Pranipataji,

 

I found your response (b,d,e) to be illuminating although I did not

follow entirely.

 

1. You have said " The vyasti who feels " is known as jiva. We do not

say " The samasthi who feels " . Would it be more appropriate to say " The

vyasti who understands the samasthi as virat, ... " calls the Samasthi

as Ishvara, where Ishvara here is used to refer to samasthi and not

just the karana aspect.

 

2. I do not fully follow the refutation of parinama vada. Are we

saying that the so-called effects are just Brahman seen as such, due

to avidya/maya? Is this what you mean by " existing always " , meaning

Brahman does not undergo real modification?

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

[Guest guest]

Namaskarams Sri Pranipataji, I found your response (b,d,e) to be illuminating although I did notfollow entirely. 1. You have said "The vyasti who feels" is known as jiva. We do notsay "The samasthi who feels". Would it be more appropriate to say "Thevyasti who understands the samasthi as virat, ...." calls the Samasthias Ishvara, where Ishvara here is used to refer to samasthi and notjust the karana aspect.2. I do not fully follow the refutation of parinama vada. Are wesaying that the so-called effects are just Brahman seen as such, dueto avidya/maya? Is this what you mean by "existing always", meaningBrahman does not undergo real modification?thollmelukaalkizhu

Hari Om! Pranaams!

 

1. You can rightly say so but there is nothing wrong in the phrase 'the samasthi who feels' as it is in accordance with shruti -so kaamayata...

 

2. Brahman is our concept and parinama is not our vada. The parinamavadin says the world the effect, existed in its cause prakriti which is real and independent of purusa. So two realities occur which we reject as prakriti cannot have independent reality or existence.

In Shri Guru Smriti,Br. Pranipata Chaitanya