Kashmiri Shaivism

Shrinivas Gadkari sgadkari2001 at YAHOO.COM
Mon May 6 13:38:33 CDT 2002

>Namaste Srinivas,
>However, if you claim that the jiva can fall again, then this certainly is
>not the Advaita position. For jiva to attain mukti is to rid itself of
>avidya. Once the avidya is gone, there is no danger whatsoever. Otherwise,
>all this striving for mukti would be pointless. For a jiva to be in a
>constant state of yoga would imply that there is always such a *thing* as
>jiva and that there is such a thing as a *state of yoga*; we have already
>negated the "brahma satyam jagan mithya" declaration.
>Could you give some examples from these Puranas wherein a liberated one
>fell again into bondage.

Namaste Ashish,

Some examples from pauranic accounts:

When Sati burnt herself, Bhagvan Rudra was immersed in grief. And Bhagvan
Vishnu had to intervene.

Bhagvan Rudra had to run to save himself from Bhasmasura again Bhagvan
Vishnu had to intervene.

In the amarnath episode, Bhagvan Rudra told Parvati that he knows may
secrets to avoid death. That is to say, he has to practise yoga.

Bhagvan Brahma, Vishnu and Rudra were cursed by sage Brighu, showing that
even they are a subject to curses.

Two residents of Vaikuntha were cursed to take birth as Hiranyaksha and
Hiranyakashapu. Nahusha fell from heaven to become a snake.

Indra has been cursed many a times, e.g. Ahilya episode and had to suffer.

Such accounts make me suspect that one cannot assume that it is possible
to establish oneself eternally in perfect yoga. Small lapses will be
there. What is important is to have the knowledge and skill to recover
from such temporary lapses and prevent them from snowballing. This in
my view is liberation.

Then what is this big deal about brahma jnana ?
On acquiring brahma jnana/ atma jnana, the practice of yoga becomes
effortless. This is the great value of brahma jnana. Hence acquiring
brahama jnana is equivalent of liberation.
(Again this is my understanding and is possible that may be incorrect.)

>But where is this creation taking place if we go by the pAramArthik view?
>Brahman, as we know from Vedanta, is Ekameva-advitIyam, one without a

Creation is a image projected in the mind of Jiva. The same as with

>However the question would be why a perfect one would need to rejoice, with
>or without intent. Then we can no longer call It the perfect one as It too
>has states of rejoicing and non-rejoicing, the latter being a not-so-
>perfect state.

No one knows answer to this question. Why does the perfect one
wish to entertain itself ?
We just know that it does like to play and this world emerges.


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list