[Advaita-l] Ishwara Turiya?

[Rajaram Venkataramani]

On Monday, March 12, 2012, Vidyasankar Sundaresan <svidyasankar at hotmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
>> I don't see how Saguna Brahman, who is beyond
>> even cosmic mind (Hiranyagarbha) can be in unreal states such as
jagratha,
>> svapna and susupti, which are mental states).
>
> Rajaram, you seem to be tying yourself up in needless knots about this.
Please
> read gItAbhAshya 8.18 which talks of brahmaNaH svApa and jAgrad avasthA.
It
> is not as if ISvara is *really* in states like jAgrat, svapna and
sushupti. If you
> can understand that such states are only figuratively described of
ISvara, then
> you are on your way to understanding ajAti vAda.
>
As far as I see, BG 8.18 refers to the states of Avyakta and Hiranyagarbha,
not Ishwara, who is beyond these states.

>>
>> Gaudapakarika mantra VII - Turiya, the changeless ruler (isa)
>
> Which citation are you thinking of here? The 7th verse of the kArikA (I
presume
> you are referring to the first chapter, Agama-prakaraNa) says,
....
> Where is ISa here? Are you thinking of the word Siva in the above
sentence as
> referring to ISa? If yes, I suggest you study the kArikA bhAshya on this
properly.

I am referring to the following:
"Mandukya Upanishad Verse VII:

VII: Turiya is not that which is conscious of the inner (subjective) world,
nor that which is conscious of the outer (objective) world, nor that which
is conscious of both, nor that which is a mass of consciousness. It is not
simple consciousness nor is It unconsciousness. It is unperceived,
unrelated, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable and indescribable.
The essence of the Consciousness manifesting as the self in the three
states, It is the cessation of all phenomena; It is all peace, all bliss
and non—dual. This is what is known as the Fourth (Turiya). This is Atman
and this has to be realized.


10 Turiya, the changeless Ruler, is capable of destroying all miseries. All
other entities being unreal, the non—dual Turiya alone is known as
effulgent and all—pervading."


>
> Vidyasankar
>
> ps. In some of your other recent posts, it seems as if you want to
particularly
> differentiate between guNa and viSesha in some way. What exactly is your
> idea of guNa and how is it different from your idea of visesha?

A person is lazy and unclean. We say he is tamasic. The adjectives, lazy
and unclean are viseshas. The generalised cause tamas is guna. For samsara
and panchabautika loka, trigunatmika apara maya is the cause. For viseshas
such as Rama, Krishna, Linga etc., Paramaya, non-different from Ishwara,is
the cause. I am not referring to the panchabautika bimbo created by us of
Rama, Krishna etc., but to His avirbhava manifestation by His sankalpa.