[Advaita-l] Iswara swaruupam - 3

abhishek sm abhishek046 at gmail.com
Wed Apr 4 07:57:54 CDT 2012


Evil and good are only relative terms. Just like hot and cold. Fire
can cook food as well as burn forests. Fire is good at some times and
evil at other. For that reason, Sankara describes samsara through the
words- "Mayamayam idam". It is illusionary. Ishwara is also a product
of this Maya and hence is illusionary. Maya is not evil, neither is
Ishwara. Ishwara+Evil,etc woul be incorrect. Para, apara,etc would be
the adhishtanam of Brahman only. Since good, bad,etc are not known as
opposites, neither Brahman nor ishwara can be called evil. This maybe
possible in dvaita where Ishwara can be accredited to the creation of
evil, but certainly not in advaita. Bifurcating Brahman by taking out
Ishwara,etc from Brahman, like as if it were taking out a mug of water
from the sea would be wrong. Even a mug of water though insignificant,
still makes a difference. But this is not true in the case of Brahman.
As said by Bhaskarji, Ishwara+Para+Apara,etc = Brahman but
Brahman=?!!?(Simply undefined). Any description would be incomplete.

On 4/4/12, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:
> praNAms Sri rAjarAm prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
> But I responded on the list on seeing that Ishwara is officially reduced
> to a mere combination of Brahman + Evil.
>>  OK, can we say this 'evil' what you are saying is exclusive of that
> brahman??  If you see the 'evil' in aparA prakruti nirmita saMsAra, for
> that 'evil' also the 'adhishtAna' is brahman only.  In advaita, you cannot
> bifurcate brahman and 'evil' (if at all aparA=evil)and assign a separate
> exclusive status to this evil.  satyanchAnrutaNcha satyamabhavatu says
> taitireeya.  So, the appropriate equation would be
> Ishwara+para+apara+resultant evil (etc.) = brahman but brahman = !!??
> (cannot be expressed by speech and mind) yato vAcho nivartante aprApya
> manasasaha.  ananyatvepi kArya kAraNayOH kAryasya kArANAtmatmatvaM na tu
> kAraNasya kAryAtmatvaM. kArya cannot exist on its own without kAraNa, but
> kAraNa can exist without any dependency on kArya.  This is the crux of the
> teaching of kArya-kAraNa ananyatva in advaita.
> Even if I read a countless times the bhashyam on 7.4 - 7.7, I can only see
> that Ishwara is transcendent and real. Paramaya is essentially Ishwara.
> This world is unreal but with real as basis.
>>  I think Sri subbu prabhuji & Sri Vidya prabhuji have explained clearly
> the intricacies of these bhAshya vAkya-s and also asked you to study these
> bhAshya along with 13th chapter.  Kindly spend more time on this.  You
> have to give special attention on prakrutiM purushaM chaiva, vidhyAnAdee
> upAvapi verse & bhAshya on it.  Here shankara explains both para & aparA
> prakruti-s form the Ishwaratva, since Ishwara is anAdi his prakruti-s also
> have to be anAdi only.
> I think you are not differentiating between Ishwara or Brahman, Avyakta,
> Hiranyagarbha and Virata. And hence reducing Ishwara to the level of being
> a mee illusion.
>>  Kindly highlight the difference with bhAshya quotes and explain us how
> does this explanation supports your stand on Ishwara.
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list