[Advaita-l] Shankara and DrishTi-SrishTi vAda - eka jeeva vaada
agnimile at gmail.com
Sat May 7 06:36:34 CDT 2016
Thank you so much for sharing your conversation with Swamiji. I believe DSV
does imply eka jIva vAda. However what that eka jIva is, is the crux here.
My understanding of this vAda is that it is the one kAraNa sharIra that
"creates" the world as it were. It is not what the vjnAna vAdi considers as
the mind that is the jagat kartA.
However, the appearance of several jIvAs is also a product of that one
kAraNa sharIra only. Hence, my understanding is that it is that kAraNa
sharIra limited chaitanyam that is the eka jIva in Drishti Srishti vAda.
I remember Swamiji saying this (that it is the kAraNa sharIra that is the
srishti kartA, not the mind) when introducing drishti srishti in
On 7 May 2016 11:58 a.m., "kuntimaddi sadananda" <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>
> The discussion is shifting from DSV - SDV to Ekajeeva vaada vs aneka jeeva
> vaada, and this topic was discussed by Shree Subbuji in the past. At that
> time I had some discussions with Swami Paramarthanandaji on this topic. I
> am re-posting my understanding based on that discussion with Swamiji.
> Related to the Ekajeeva vaaada vs aneka jeeva vaada - I think Shree
> Bhaskarji is right, this time!
> Here is my understanding:
> Eka jiiva vaada
> First – an acknowledgement – this current writing is prompted by the posts
> on creation and cognition by local tiny jiiva based on Bhagavatam (Uddhava
> Geeta) sloka, with many indirect supportive teachings by Shree Subbuji. .
> Yesterday, I had a chance to discuss this issue with Shree Swami
> Paramarthanandaji about the jest of the eka-jiiva vaada. Since Swamiji is
> not a member of any list, I would paraphrase this write-up as my
> understanding of what Swamiji discussed. Needless to say, that it is left
> to the reader to accept or reject the statements.
> There was a consideration that creation involves only one jiiva, the
> subject and the other entities constituting the world forming the objects
> of his cognition. Ignorance of that jiiva involves parichchinnatvam or
> notion of limitation that I am only this body, mind and intellect, while
> the rest of the creation constitutes objects of his cognition. As usual,
> samsaara or suffering comes by giving absolute reality to the cognized
> world of plurality. Teaching to that jiiva is that whatever that is
> cognized is not really real but mithyaa; since whatever cognized is inert
> and there cannot be any real inert entities since consciousness is infinite
> – prajnaanam brahma.
> Here we need to recognize three aspects that are involved in this model;
> a) creation of plurality b) cognition of that plurality by senses c)
> teaching to that jiiva that any cognized entity is not real. Realization,
> as usual, involves recognition that I am Brahman, and anything else is
> naama rupa mithyaa, and I am the substratum even for the mithyaa world of
> There are several concerns and questions that arise from this model. Some
> of them, were discussed in the past. These include a) jiiva creating the
> world of plurality and then cognizing what he has created, and assuming
> that the world of plurality that is cognized in real. To that jiiva there
> is a teaching that it is not real but mithyaa.
> 1) First concern that comes up is if he is the creator and then cognizing
> the creation, the teaching does not differ from vijnaana vaada of Buddhism.
> 2) Second concern is if he is the creator of the whole universe, he must
> be sarva jnana or all knower, since creation requires the whole knowledge
> of creation. He has to create from himself – that is he has to be abhinna
> nimitta upaadana kaaraNa of the universe – that is both material and
> intelligent cause for the universe. If so he is taking the role of Iswara
> of that creation while being a local tiny jiiva.
> 3) Being the material cause also, he is the adhiShTaanam of the universe
> too – here we are not referring to sat chit ananda swaruupa aatma but eka
> jiiva of that creation since in this model he is the creator.
> 4) Another concern is creation should take place after he became a tiny
> jiiva since the model involves the creation and cognition by the tiny jiiva
> who has to be pre-existing before creation starts.
> 5) The item 4 leads to anyonya aashraya dosha or mutual dependency, like A
> depends on B and B depends of A – This is because the jiiva has to be
> created first for him to create the rest that includes in BMI which is part
> of cognized world. Jiiva hood itself is due to identification with upAdhis,
> BMI, as I am this. Thus he creates himself to create the rest including his
> BMI for him to cognize.
> 6) He must have become ignorant after he created the universe, that makes
> the ignorance to have beginning. Knowledgeable person cannot become
> ignorant. If he becomes, then there is no question of moksha for him since
> he can always become ignorant even after gaining knowledge. It is an
> eternal struggle.
> 7) Next important concern is who the teacher for this single jiiva is.
> Non-jiiva cannot teach and there is no other jiiva, even for him to realize
> and then teach.
> I recognize some of the concerns are interdependent but I am only
> highlighting them to recognize the problems that one encounters. The basic
> problem is statement that he creates and then cognizes.
> Because of the limited time encounter, Swamiji answered briefly my
> concerns grasping the essence of them. He said in the deep sleep state
> there is only kaaraNa shariira which is essentially ignorance of all
> duality as we discussed in the series – who slept well?. The ignorance
> being undifferentiated, since there is no duality, the ignorance at both
> individual level and collective level is one homogenous ignorance. From the
> collective point it is called maayaa, which is nothing but parameswara
> Shakti. Hence in Madukya aagama prakarana the kaaraNa state is also defined
> from the macro scale as Iswara. Creation is by that Iswara and not by the
> local mind of the jiiva, even in the eka jiiva vaada – the reason, he said,
> is that even the local mind has to be created. We are back to the original
> theory that creation is not by the local jiiva but by Iswara who is
> sarvajna and sarva Shaktimaan.
> Eka jiiva comes from the point that there is only one subject from his
> perspective and everything he cognizes is object of his perception. The
> teaching he receives is also via his sense perception and his cognition and
> therefore objectifiable entity. To the question that who is the teacher
> then, he just smiled and says your guess is as good as mine. He
> categorically denied that it is not that local jiiva creates and then
> cognizes since the cognitive instruments need to be created too. He agreed
> that if we accept creation and then cognition by that jiiva, then it will
> not be different from vijnana vaada of Buddhism.
> I left him since there were others in line seeking his attention.
> With prostrations to Shree Swamiji for educating me on this topic.
> Hari Om!
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list