[Advaita-l] Which one is first in the creation sequence

[H S Chandramouli]

Sri Lalithalaalithaji,

Thank you very much. My doubt stand resolved. I could not have got a
clearer and more authoritative answer . Thanks once again.

Regards

chandramouli


2014-03-06 14:43 GMT+05:30 श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <
lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com>:

> *श्रीमल्ललितालालितः *www.lalitaalaalitah.com
>
>
> 2014-03-05 21:17 GMT+05:30 श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <
> lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com>:
>
> > ​​
> >  H:
> >
> > The words " mayopadhika Iswara " and " mayavishishta Iswara " are both
> used
> > frequently in the literature on vedanta. Many times in the same work
> > itself. Both refer to Ishwara only contextually in all the places.
> >
> > But while explaining the concept of Iswara they consider maya ( avidya )
> as
> > visheshana to Chaitanya from the standpoint of Iswara and same maya (
> > avidya ) as upadhi from the standpoint of Chaitanya.
> >
> > This corresponds to antahkarana as being visheshana to Chaitanya from the
> > standpoint of jiva while the same antahkarana is an upadhi to Chaitanya
> > from the standpoint of Sakshi ( kutastha ) .
> >
> >
> > What is the word corresponding to Sakshi at the level of maya as
> described
> > above.
> >
> > L:
> > ईश्वरसाक्षीपदमेव वेदान्तपरिभाषाकारेण ईश्वरसम्बन्धिप्रत्यक्षस्य
> > मायोपहितचैतन्यरूपस्य निरूपणाय प्रयुक्तम् । तथा हि तद्वाक्यानि :
> >
> > *तदुपहितं चैतन्यम् ईश्वरसाक्षी । तच्च अनादि , तदुपाधेर्मायाया अनादित्वात्
> > ।*
> >
> > *मायावच्छिन्नं चैतन्यञ्च परमेश्वरः ।*
> >
> > *मायाया विशेषणत्वे ईश्वरत्वम् उपाधित्वे साक्षित्वम् इति
> > ईश्वरसाक्षित्वयोर्भेदः न तु धर्म्मिणोरीश्वरतत्साक्षिणोः ।*
> >
> > इति ।
> >
> > तथा च एकस्यैव धर्म्मिणः चैतन्यस्य ईश्वरसाक्षित्वेन व्यवहारो भवति मायाया
> > उपाधित्वेन ग्रहणे इति वेदान्तपरिभाषाकारस्य रीतिः । ईश्वरस्य
> > ईश्वरसाक्षिणश्चाभेद एव , एकस्यैव चैतन्यस्य तत्तत्सञ्ज्ञकत्वात् ।
> >
> > अत्र विशेषणोपाध्योर्भेदस्तदुक्तः स्मर्त्तव्यः । तथा हि
> >
> > *विशेषणञ्च कार्य्यान्वयि वर्त्तमानं व्यावर्त्तकम् उपाधिश्च कार्य्यानन्वयी
> > व्यावर्त्तको वर्त्तमानश्च ।*
> >
> > इति ।
> >
> > इत्थं यदा जगत्कारणत्वेन चैतन्यस्य निरूपणं क्रियते तदा मायाया विशेषणत्वेन
> > तस्येश्वरपदवाच्यत्वम् । यदा तु ईश्वरीयज्ञानत्वेन तस्यैव चैतन्यस्य निरूपणं
> > क्रियते तदा मायाया जडत्वेन कार्य्यानन्वयित्वात् तस्यैव चैतन्यस्य
> ईश्वरपदभाज
> > ईश्वरसाक्षित्वेन ईश्वरीयप्रत्यक्षत्वेन व्यवहारो भवति ।
> >
>
> Author of ​vedAntaparibhAShA​
>
> ​uses the term 'IshvarasAxI' to denote the 'direct perception related to
> Ishvara', which is mAyopahita-chaitanya.
> Thus he said:
> *mAyopahita-chaitanya is Ishvara-sAxI. That is begining-less, because so is
> it's upAdhi.*
>
> *mAyAvachchhinna-chaitanya is Ishvara.*
>
>
> *When mAyA is considered visheShaNa, then it is Ishvaratvam; when upAdhi,
> then sAxitvam - is the difference of Ishvaratva and sAxitva; and not of
> Ishvara and sAxI.*
> So, A single entity, which is consciousness, is known as Ishvara-sAxI when
> mAyA is considered upAdhi - is the way paribhAShAkAra explians.
> Ishvara and sAxI are one because the same thing is called with both names.
>
> Here we should remember what is said about difference of visheShaNa and
> upAdhi:
> *That which is 'related to effect', present and separating from others, is
> called visheShaNa. That which is 'not related to effect', present and
> differentiating, is called upAdhi.*
>
> So, when chaitanya is denoted as 'cause of all', then mAyA is visheShaNa
> and hence the chaitanya is called Ishvara.
> When the same chaitanya is denoted as 'pratyaxa related to Ishvara', then
> mAyA being jaDa(useless for the revelation/illuumination of objects) is
> upAdhi and hence the same chaitanya which was termed 'Ishvara' is called
> Ishvara-sAxI or Ishvara-pratyaxa.
> ​
>
> >  H:
> >
> > Is it Bimbachaitanya?
> >
> >
> > L:
> >
> > अत एव यदा बिम्बचैतन्यस्येश्वरत्वं तदा तस्यैव बिम्बस्यैव ईश्वरसाक्षित्वमपि
> > इति ज्ञेयम् ।
> >
> > मायायाः परं बिम्बत्वप्रयोजिकायाः कार्य्यान्वयित्वं न वा इत्यादाय
> > विशेषणत्वोपाधित्वे भवतः तदादाय च तस्य ईश्वरत्वसाक्षित्वव्यवहारौ ।
> >
>
> ​Hence, when bimba-chaitanya is Ishvara, then the same bimba-chaitanya is
> Ishvara-sAxI also.
> ​
>
>
> > H:
> > That is my question. The two terms mayavishishta and mayopadhika are both
> > used to address Iswara.
> >
> >
> > L:
> >
> > सत्यम् ।
> >
>
> ​True.
> ​
>
>
> >  H:
> >
> > My doubt is how can the same Iswara have maya as his upadhi as well as be
> > endowed with it ?
> >
> >
> > L:
> >
> > तत्र विचार्य्यैव निर्णेयं यत् उपाधिपदेन विशेषणं विवक्षितं न वा ।
> >
>
> ​You should decide after considering whether the word 'upAdhi' means
> 'visheShaN' or not.
> ​
>
>
> >  H:
> >
> > After all Iswara is Chaitanya + maya.
> >
> > Upadhi cannot be part of the vastu itself.
> >
> >
> > L:
> >
> > वस्तुत्वं तु शुद्धस्यैवास्मन्मते । तच्च निरवयवम् । अत एव युक्तमेवोक्तं
> > स्यात् यदि एतदभिप्रेतं स्यात् ।
> >
> > न च तथा विवक्षितं मिथ्याभूतस्येश्वरस्यैवात्र विचार्य्यत्वात् । अत एव
> > अयुक्तमिदं वचः ।
> >
> > अथापि ईश्वरस्य विशिष्टचैतन्यत्वेन सांशत्वमभ्युपेयमेव ।
> >
> > किञ्च भवतैवोक्तं ‘
> > ​​
> > Iswara = Chaitanya + maya’ इति अतः सांशत्वमेवेश्वरस्य ।
> >
> >
> ​In our system, only shuddha-chaitanya is vastu. That is devoid of parts.
> Hence, if you meant 'shuddha' in your sentence, then you were correct.
> But, that is not the case because we are talking about Ishvara. So, you
> appear wrong.
>
> We have to accept that Ishvara has parts because Ishvara is
> vishiShTa-chaitanya.
> What more, you yourself said that :
> ​
> ​
> Iswara = Chaitanya + maya
> So, Ishvara has parts.
>
> I don't know how correct is my translation because I don't know equivalents
> of saMskR^ita-words and rules of English-Grammar well. Even then I hope it
> will be able to express my views.
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>