f. maiello egodust at DIGITAL.NET
Thu May 21 11:17:46 CDT 1998

Gummuluru Murthy wrote:

> I see only two states.
> The jeeva state, or the state of ignorance, and
> The nirguNa state, the state of jnAna.
> The jeeva state includes the saguNa state mentioned above. In the state of
> ignorance, jeeva sees creation, and with jeeva incapable of creation,
> invokes Ishwara, the creator. But jeeva can never be the creator, and
> hence, can the saguNa state have the status of a state ? However, it is
> an important sub-state which allows us (i) to see the limitations of the
> jeeva, and (ii) to surrrender the ego with humility to a superior power.

In my view, any of these vaadas can be effective for an individual toadopt.  The
main issue is how effective is any given [what amounts to
being a] philosophical strategy.

For someone on the path of jnana, IMO, the most effective strategy
holds the purest doctine od advaita.  That is: "All of this is brahman."
Including the saguna aspect.  Now, obviously, *within* that aspect
lurks the potential trap set by maya: which is the tendency to mistake
any of the guna manifestations *as things unto themselves*.  It is
*this* constituent of the saguna brahman which is the cause and
sustenance of the primal disconnect of ajnana.

Sankara's advaitic formula clearly addresses this.  Unfortunately,
the way it was originally drafted evidently left it vulnerable to
misinterpretation.  Hoever, if we can agree on the intent of what it
is conveying, we'd be at a great advantage...the most transformative
clarity will result.

Using slight adjustments in word choices, consider:  (bear in mind
the aforementioned necessity for extracting Sankara's *intent* set
out in the original)

1. brahman is the sole reality.
2. sohamidam is an illusion.
3. brahman is sohamidam.

(sohamidam is isvara, jiva, jagat...being all created out of the
Mind of jiva, representing an act based on drishti-srishti vaada Sadananda just pointed out in the example he gave from
Bhagavan RM's Upadesa Saram)

...where sohamidam in #2 is illusion if/when considered
real *unto itself*, otherwise it is #3, only brahman.

If studied carefully, the clarity will emerge.


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list