[Advaita-l] dRShTi-sRShTi definitions in the advaitasiddhi
agnimile at gmail.com
Tue Aug 15 12:28:47 EDT 2017
I believe one of the conclusions from vAcaspati mishrA's nAna avidyA paksha
is not only multiple jIvas, but multiple Ishvaras and multiple universes
too! The logic is that Ishvara in this matam is kalpita or imagined due to
jIva's avidyA. The universe is also a creation of that avidyA.
Therefore, the avidyA of each jIva is responsible for the projection of a
unique universe, and along with it an Ishvara that the jIva imagines is the
creator, sustainer and destroyer of that universe. Upon the rise of jnAna,
that individual jIva's avidyA is destroyed, along with that jIva's universe
and that jIva's imagined Ishvara.
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> Namaste Anandji,
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 7:16 PM, Anand Hudli via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> > सर्वलोकादिसृष्टिश्च तत्तद्दृष्टिव्यक्तिम् अभिप्रेत्य, यदा यत् पश्यति,
> > तत्समकालं तत् सृजति इत्यत्र तात्पर्यात्। Due to the usage तत्-तत्-दृष्टि-
> > व्यक्तिम्, I wonder if this statement of MS could also accommodate NJV?
> > >>
> > Sorry for the late reply.
> Not at all, I just repeated the question since it was one question to you
> in a long mail to Chandramouliji, so it was likely missed. Thanks for your
> > I am inclined to think that this does not refer
> > to NJV, since the original Brihadaranyaka Upanishad context under
> > discussion is about a single self, in the form of a dialog between
> > ajAtashatru and gArgya. The word "vyakti", which could be misleading,
> > refers to an instance of dRShTi, rather than an individual. So it means
> > with each instance of dRShTi, there is a corresponding sRShTi that takes
> > place contemporaneously.
> Although, I too interpreted दृष्टिव्व्यक्ति as कर्मधारय translating to
> "individual sights", but I wondered if it could be made द्वन्द्व by someone
> to somehow accommodate Bhamatikara's NJV (although to do so strictly it
> should have been व्यक्तिदृष्टि)।
> > However, I would also like to add that the DSV discussion is for the most
> > part free from NJV or EJV, although it is better to assume EJV, as it
> > naturally leads into EJV in the next section.
> I had particularly not seen the context in which the AS discussion takes
> place and made सङ्गति connections, sorry! But I did see that EJV follows
> this section.
> > The NJV version would have
> > gaurava, (heaviness) since each jIva would have to have its own avidyA
> > the purpose of creation.
> Thanks, I'd said this very thing to my Acharyaji in one discussion on
> Bhamatikara's DSV version that I don't need NJV at all since EJV is
> लाघवम्। He seemed to agree. Yet, I don't think I landed this wonderful
> thing of अविद्याश्रय with EJV the way you do below.
> Further, it may also imply each jIva is the locus
> > of its own avidyA. Except vAchaspati, advaitins usually agree with
> > in maintaining that Brahman is the locus of avidyA.
> > This also ties in what I remember Chandramouliji mentioning recently as
> per another book wherein the author says Vivarana is EJV, while Bhamati is
> NJV. I was wondering as to how that conclusion was arrived at. Now it
> perfectly syncs in. Thanks much; this is very helpful.
> --Praveen R. Bhat
> /* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
> That owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list