[Advaita-l] Eternal Loka
rajaramvenk at gmail.com
rajaramvenk at gmail.com
Mon Jul 29 01:45:48 CDT 2013
Hare Krishna. Avyakta for him is a-brahman not parabrahman. It is a different matter that by svarupa this avyakta (like every thing else) is brahman. Let him clarify.
Appayya Dikshitar does differentiate between Ishwara and Brahman. In one drshti, one becomes Ishwara not Brahman. Let's come to that later. For now, if no one knows what happened in the previous kalpa, please tell me how the rewards of action are given in the next. How do you even know there are many kalpas?
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at braincells.com>
Sender: "Advaita-l" <advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 18:40:40
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Reply-To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Eternal Loka
On Sat, 27 Jul 2013, rajaramvenk at gmail.com wrote:
> Hare Krishna. There is no confusion of terminology but a clear
> contradiction in understanding between two traditional scholars on a
> basic point. I asked a specific question about what happens to sarvajna
> Ishwara and Vedas. Jaldhar said that both merge in to Parabrahman and
> lose identity. According to you, everything merges in to Ishwara
Where in Shri Subrahmanian's replies to you does he suggest this avyakta
is anything other than what I have referred to as parabrahman? We are
both referring to the nirguna sole existent self.
In the phenomenal material universe we perceive Brahman as possessing
lordly qualities such as omniscience etc and call it Ishwar.
In the potential universe, material yet unmanifest, we refer to is as
avyakta or Parabrahman etc.
It is also possible to speak of Brahman without reference to the universe
The Samkhyas also use the term avyakta. For them it is an inert thing and
the contraction and expansion of universes occurs automatically. But
while the Vedantins accept an unmanifest state of the universe, it is
Brahman that pervades all even then. This is why Shankaracharya
frequently uses the phrase "Narayana who is higher than the avyakta" The
difference between the Vedantic and Samkhya definition of avyakta is
explained in the bhashya on brahmasutra 2.4.7
> There is a reason why this contradiction or a difference in perspective
> exists in the tradition. In fact, it goes all the way up to liberation.
> Does a jIvA realise ekatva with Brahman or Ishwara? The common answer is
> Brahman. Appayya Dikshitar takes up this question and says it is
And do you think Appayya Dikshit means anything other than Brahman by
> Neither of you have answered what happens to the omniscience of the lord
> in mahapralaya.
What is omniscience? The perfect knowledge of all places and times. If
there are no places and times there is no scope for omniscience or an
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list