Ajata and Vivarta.

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Chittaranjan Naik "

<chittaranjan_naik> wrote:

>

> Namaste Dennis-ji and Bhaskar-ji,

>

Namaste,

 

It seems to me that much is ascribed to Sankara that perhaps he

didn't write. However the Brahma Sutra and commentaries are more

than likely his. Sankara at the time was refuting Buddhism as most

people couldn't understand it and thought it was atheism, or

somthing similar. So IMO Sankara, like all sages taught at several

levels. Which means at each level it is appropriate and true to the

audience, like Ramana for example.

 

Therefore it is my opinion that Sankara taught Ajatavada as well as

Vivartavada. Hoever the ultimate Truth must be Ajatavada, for

nothing is unfolding. There is no question of non existence becoming

existence for it never happened at all. There is no existence or pre

existence and at the same time it is only a void in the fact that it

is not pre existent, unfolding or manifest.

 

There is no substratum, otherwise it would still exist on the death

of the body/mind in a Mukta and it is said by Sages not to exist.

 

It is not possible to understand Nirguna so we only have to drop the

veil. This is very difficult for people on the Bhakti path or even

on the Jnani Path of Saguna Brahman. Sometimes we just have to

accept the fact that we cannot understand everything with a finite

mind. Eventually we have to let go of the fear and the comfort of

Saguna. Buddha didn't teach complete void anyway. He said there was

an unmanifest an unbecoming.

 

It seems to me that taking into account of what is said by

Jivanmuktas there is nothing happening at all, for it is all only

associated with the body and mind. So I would plump for Sankara's

teaching being ultimately Ajatavada for that is the state of the

Jivanmukta, at death.............ONS..Tony.

 

 

CN wrote:-

Advaita is based on the principle of the pre-existence of the

effect

> in the cause. This being the case, the term 'vivartavada' more

> appropriately describes the Advaita position of 'non-creation'

than

> does the term 'ajativada'. Why?

>

> The term 'vivarta' indicates an 'unfolding'. What is it that

unfolds

> in creation? It is not possible for the non-existent to come into

> existence. What comes into existence must necessarily be already

> existing. When a thing that is not manifested is said to be non-

> existing, it is only covered over, as it were. Therefore, its

coming

> into being is the showing forth of the already existent – a

> phenomenon that the word 'unfolding' describes better than a word

> having the connotation of voidness. The instrument of unfolding is

> speech (indicating that an insight into the nature of speech is

> important for the understanding of Advaita Vedanta). The unfolding

> does not truly create anything new, but only shows forth names and

> forms that are eternally one with Brahman. To echo the Acharya's

> words: " Just as Brahman, the cause is never without existence in

all

> the three periods of time, so also the universe, which is the

effect,

> never parts with Existence in all the three periods. " Therefore

there

> is no creation in the absolute sense; there is only the magic

> of 'Leela' (sport) played out in the realm of names and forms

resting

> on the substratum of Brahman with which they are One. (To see the

> mystery of Oneness requires ratio - reason - to return to the cave

of

> the heart from which it originated.)

>

> The word 'vivarta' implies a substratum out of which the world

> unfolds, whereas the word 'ajati' implies a voidness of things.

> Still, the term 'ajativada' may be employed in a certain sense for

> explaining the Advaita position. The world seen by the ajnyani

> (ignorant) is false because it is seen divested of the Self that

is ......<<