[Advaita-l] reply on visistAdvaita & vyAvahArika

[Antharyami]

query >> As per advaita the multifarious jiiva is due to multifarious karmas
which are anAdi. I thought visisTaadvaita also relates the jiiva utpaatti to
anAdi avidya due to multifarious karma only.  The avidya is not knowing the
sheSha sheShi  bhAva. I am not sure if there is jiiva-jIva bhinnatvam in
VaikunTa after salvation - there should be but on what basis, I do not know
- tAra tamya bhedas should be there moxa too since MahAlaxmi is different
from viSvaksena, nArada etc.  In dvaita there are hierarchies of jiivas each
one only enjoying their pot full of happiness and there are some jiivas in
eternal hell. Ramanuja does not subscribe to that but yet there is
jiiva-jiiva binnatvam although each one is enjoying the infinite happiness
in moxa.

* *

First of all the influence of karma never has any impact on jIva-atman. The
Atman according to advaita is common. Undifferentiated with Brahman. the
jIvAtma bedha is completely baseless as explained by Adi Sankara in his
Bagawad gItA bAsya. Ironically RamAnujA in his gItA bAshya (2:12) states
that 'Evam bagavatha:  sarvEswarAth, AtmAnAm paraspara ca bEdha: pAramArtika
iti bagavataivOktamiti pratIyate pAramArtikAnityatvOpadE samayE aham, tvam,
imE sarvE vayamiti vyapadEshAth |



The bAshya affirms paraspara jIva bEdam. The term imE emphatically stresses
jIva bEdam proclaimed by rAmAnujA. Here aAdi Sankara in his commentary
issues that 'dehEbEtAbiprAyEna bahuvacanam nAtma bEdAbiprayEna| ie., the
multiplicity here denotes the dEha bEdam and not the Atma bEdam to jIvA's.
the material multiplicity is only due to mAya, wherein the commonness is
merely diversified.



In  visishtAdvaita philosophy,  avidya means, not knowing the truth about
'sarIra sarIri bAva' ie., jIvAtman is different from paramAtman and the
former the sarIra for the latter. (The 'sEsa sEshi bAva' is an organ for
prapatthi). For them, the jiva bEda (wrongly mentioned as jIva binnatvam)
persists even in Vaikunta. jIva's are three by classification. Bakta, mukta
& nitya. MahAlakshmi and visvaksEnAdI's are nitya-muktA's. The tAra tamya
bedha prevails with the sajadIya beda category ( visajIya bEda & svagAta
bEda are the other two) which ascribes special distinction to MahAlakshmi
from other nithya-muktA's. As far as these differences are concerned Adi
Sankara categorically rejects such, as he declares nitya caitanya alone is
sat, which is not influenced by these guna visEsA's. The svagAta bEda is
also rejected since nithya caitanya is nirvisEsa. In
utpathyasambavAdhikaranam of Brahma sUtra, Adi shankara does not accept the
jIva utpathi prescribed by the pAncarAtra Agama.Adi Sankara identifies the
incompatibility of kArana kArya bEda in jIva utpatthi by stating 'kArana
prAptau kAryasya pravilaya prasangAt'; also, he mentions 'utpatthi matvEhi
jIvasya anityatvAdi dOshaprasangatvAt' as jIva utpatthi regards anityatvam
to the same which is contrary to vEda vAkyAs. In the end ridicules the
pAcharAtra Agama by quoting 'nAtma asctE nityatvAt ca dAbhya: (BS:2-3-17)

-- 
Antharyami
[J.Devanathan]