[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: Ishvara-authored Srishti avidyākrta - Says Shankara

[Sunil Bhattacharjya]

Dear Sujalji,

"I am Brahman" is a true statement, However we are in a sort of hynotised state and we feel that we are unable to see the truth. We have to dehypnotise ourselves. That is what the shastras are for and that is why Adi Shankara is with us through his writings as well as our gurus are there too to help us. The individual consciousness  too is in a sort of aberration due to the hynotised state. Now you may ask me as to how we got hypnotised. The shruti tells us that Brahman wanted to be many. Brahman has the trick up His sleeve to use Maya for that and I don't think any of us can say much on this, in our hypnotised state. Lord Krishna had told us in detail in the Bhagavad Gita as to how we can dehypnotise ourselves.  The Lord permitting,  I wish to add more on what the Lord said in another text, in the next edition of the Original Bhagavad Gita. 

Another thing, I wish to mention is that the Advaita discussions are at the Paramarthika level and any reference to Vaisheshika or Nyaya views /  logic would  not really help, and rather that may create confusion  and lead to more and more futile discussions.

Regards,
Sunil KB. 

--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 5/24/16, Sujal Upadhyay <sujal.u at gmail.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: Ishvara-authored Srishti avidyākrta - Says Shankara
 To: "Sunil Bhattacharjya" <sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com>, "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 Date: Tuesday, May 24, 2016, 5:22 AM
 
 Pranams,
 
 Indeed this world
 is also asatya. The question is - does DSV needs to be
 applied from individual consciousness or from collective
 consciousness. 
 
 If we take it from
 POV of individual consciousness, then for me things become
 easy. When any object is not cognized, then for me it is
 non-existent. Similarly for me, I see this whole world as
 per my own vision. Other jIva-s do not matter to me. I cant
 see what others are seeing or perceiving. In samAdhi, there
 is no creation as there is no mind. Hence (for me), there is
 no creation, no jIva, nothing. When one feels unity with
 Brahman, one still 'feels'. Hence 'I' exist.
 There are two tatva-s - 'I' and 'Brahman',
 but not third. Beyond this feeling, there is just Brahman
 and no individual 'I'. 
 
 Maybe, various
 statements from shruti and commentaries reflect various
 states of consciousness. 
 
 OM
 
 Sujal
 
 On Tue, May 24, 2016 at
 5:43 PM, Sujal Upadhyay <sujal.u at gmail.com>
 wrote:
 Namaste,
 
 I have limited knowledge on this subject. From
 what I have heard, Buddhist version of asatkArya vAda says
 that cause transforms into effect and itself cease to exist.
 An example is milk transforming into curd. After Milk has
 transformed into curd, milk itself cease to exist. However,
 another opinion of asatkAryavAda is that it effect is not
 present in cause, whereas in satkAryavAda, effect has to be
 pre-existent in cause, else how would cause be able to
 create anything. For example, only milk can transform into
 curd as per satkAryavAda, whereas according to
 asatkAryavAda, curd can be formed from water or oil. mAyA
 has three guNa-s, hence everything it creates also has 3
 guNa-s in different permutations and combinations. There is
 no 4th guNa inside mAyA. 
 
 asatkArya vAda of vaiSeShika says that says
 that cause does not cease to exist after transforming into
 effect. So Buddhist theory of believing in demi-gods but not
 in supreme creator might get an explanation from asatkArya
 vAda. the SUNya vAda also gets support from asatkArya
 vAda.
 
 However if we take
 transformation as real, then Brahman will get divided, which
 is not acceptable. 1/4 part of Brahman will become void,
 SUNya.
 
 Maybe I am wrong, as said earlier, I
 dont have much knowledge on this subject.
 ​ 
 OM
 
 Sujal