[Advaita-l] Debunking Drishti-Srishti Vada and Eka Jiva Vada - part 1

[Aditya Kumar]

GK 3-3 : Atman may be said to be similar to Akasha(ether) manifested in the forms of the Jivaswhich may be compared to the ether enclosed in the pots. Again, as pots etc are said to be produced from the Akasha, similarly gross bodies are said to be evolved from the Atman, This is the illustration of the manifestation.
Shankara's Commentary :-
It has been said in the previous text "I shall now describe Brahman, birthless and free from all narrowness". Now I shall give an illustration and a reason to substantiate the proposition. As the supreme Atman is like the Akasha, subtle without parts and all pervasive, it is compared to the Akasha. The supreme self again, who is likened to the Akasha, is said to be manifested as the embodied beings (jivas) or kshetrajnas and are likened to the ghatakasha or the Akasha enclosed in jars. This is the supreme self which is like the Akasha. Or the sentence may be applied thus :- As the totality of the Akasha enclosed within the pots is said to constitute what is known as Mahakasha or the great expanse of ether, similarly the totality of the embodied beings (jivas) constitute the supreme being. The creation or manifestation of the Jivas from the supreme self as stated in the Vedanta is like the creation or manifestation of the ghatakasha from the mahakasha, that is to say creation or manifestation is not real. As from that Akasha are produced such physical objects as the pot etc, similarly from the supreme self which is like the Akasha are produced the entire aggregrate of material entities such as the earth etc, as well as the individual bodies all characterised by causality, the entire production being nothing but mere imagination like that of snake in the rope. Therefore it is said "the aggregates of the gross bodies are produced like the pot etc. When the sruti with a view to the enlightenment of the ignorant speaks of the creation or manifestation of the jivas from the Atman, then such manifestation being admitted as a fact, is explained with the help of the illustration of the creation of the pot etc from the Akasha. 
GK 3-3 English translation of Shankara's commentary of GK by Swamy Nikhilananda
The apparent difference between BSB 2-2-28 and BSB 2-2-29 is resolved in this verse. In fact the entire adhyaropa-apavada is clearly explained in this single passage leaving no room for ambiguity. If DSV was the ultimate view, then the creation theory would see it's end in DSV/EJV in this passage. But clearly, many jivas are admitted within vyavahara _as a fact_ but on the strength of sruti passages treating Advaita, they are rejected in paramartha. So quoting the Alatashanti verse to support DSV or apparent difference of view wrt BSB is simply incorrect. As a matter of fact, if DSV is held as the final view, then Kartritva should be attributed to Brahman. We will have to explain the obligation of Drashta to project a universe of multitude. 
This is just my opinion and I hope members do not get agitated needlessly.