[Advaita-l] Ishwara srushti - shruti bhAshya sammata
kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com
Sat Aug 5 08:21:27 EDT 2017
PraNAms to all.
Just returned from a Chinmaya Spiritual camp in Chicago where the texts that were covered were Ishavasya Upanishad and Sundara Kanda of Ramayan.
The invocation sloka - purna madaH purnamidam - introduces first that creation is infinite (idam purnam) and then the Existence-consciousness that I AM (purna adaH) is also infinite and there cannot be two infinities - puurnaat purnam udachyate - from the Pure existence-consciousness that I AM the idam purnam has come out. Here we are not referring to I AM identified with local BMI but pure existence-consciousness - sat chit ananda swaruupa Brahman is the very source of creation too. Since purnam added to or subtracted from I AM, will not affect I AM since infinity plus minus infinity remains as infinity.
The rest of the Upanishad is an explanation of the above sloka where Isha or Iswra is introduced as the all-pervading reality of the whole universe. There is no vyashTi creating samashTi anywhere. The whole Bri. Upanishad is supposed to be a commentary on this Ishawasya Up.
The analogy of dream creation is only to negate the reality that one assumes to the creation perceived in the waking state also since it is also anityam does not remain the same all the time - a basis Goudapada says for rejection of the reality for the plurality that is perceived in his second ch. of Mandukya Karika.
Rope/snake example is to show the adhyasa aspect of the creation to negate the reality that one assigns. But not to confuse the creation as praatibhaasika satyam - that is the mental projection of the individual Jeeva. Creation is naama ruupatmikam with names and forms - naming involves knowing and what is perceived is ruupas - are the attributive content of the idam, idam, and idam, since the essence of idam and idam is only Brahman which being infinite is imperceptible. Hence absolute unreality of the creation is negated and not transactional reality. We cannot transact with the snake perceived where the rope is. The example provided has to be used only up to the point of its applicability. The truth is even the mind that perceiving the world is of the same order of reality as the perceived world. The Mirage waters or sunrise and sunset are more appropriate for vyaavahaarika satyam than rope/snake example. When Bhagavat paada talks about rope/snake example, one has to understand he negating the reality aspect just as the dream creation.
However in both sRishTi-dRishTi or dRishTi-sRishTi - there is drashtaa - or seer. Hence we need to look at the validity of the seer before one evaluates the validity of the seen. Since mind itself is inert we have to come to grips with the all-pervading consciousness or Orignal consciousness (OC), the mind (the reflecting medium RM) and the reflected consciousness (RC or chidaabhasa). Then who is the real seer among these? OC cannot see, RM cannot see, and RC cannot exist without out OC and RC. Without the seer the seen cannot be established, even thought seer is not creating seen and then seeing it.
'I AM' really is the OC but take myself to be RC/RM and identifying with that RC/RM, that is the mind that is enlivened by the pure all-pervading consciousness, I take myself to be a Jeeva.
The universe is not created by the local RC/RM - who is a Jeeva or vyashTi, even though it cannot be perceived without it. Perception of the creation and assumption that it is absolutely real is not the creation and then perception. Individual RC/RM does not create the whole universe even when RC/RM is needed to have knowledge of it's own existence as well as the existence of the world. RC/RM and the World are more are less Ontologically of the same order of reality.
In the case of Rope/snake - the Jeeva is projecting the snake based on incomplete attributes that one has gathered by his senses that is, it five feet long and soft to touch and lying in the alley, etc., and thus perceiving the snake out there where the rope is. The snake is the creation of the local Jeeva using the prior samksaara and based on partial attributes or saadRisyam (or similarity between perceived rope attributes and snake attributes), and it goes away when he knows that it is rope, when he gathers the full attributive content of the object.
The vyaavarika satyam is more like the sunrise and the sunset example and is perceived even after knowing it is not really real - since it is not individual creation but Iswara's creation. This aspect of Iswra Creation is beautifully explained in the Iswavasya Upanishad. The definition of Iswara is best described in Mudaka Up. Ch. 1 sloka 9 after giving three examples of how creation is starting with spider example.
Planning to write more of what I have learned at the camp - starting with Sundara Kanda.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list