namaskAram,
To assume that karmaphalam-s are accumulated only when the manifestation of mAyA (through sRiShTi, sthiti, and laya) takes place is akin to taking the view that the AtmA itself (rather than bhagavAn) is the pradhAna, a view which I don't accept. With regards to your comment about the rAkShasa and the sAdhu, I don't see your point. Trying to measure the kRipA of bhagavAn is little more than ahaMkAr. For example, rAvaNa was a rAkShasa and never repented for his actions, yet upon being killed by rAma, he was granted mokSha/jIvanmukti. Perhaps you wouldn't forgive someone like rAvaNa, but you cant expect bhagavAn to be as petty as a human, right? You are applying human imperfections to bhagavAn, but that doesn't make sense. Just as the sun is reflected by the water, but itself isn't affected by the imperfections of the water, similarly is the case with jIva-s and brahma. That is what is meant when yAj~navalkya says "tathAtmA eko hyanekash cha jalAdhAreShviva amshumAn." That verse also has other implications. If there was no dhUp from "amshumAn" (sUrya) then the sun is no longer reflected, right? Looking at it that way, mAyA could be viewed as that which blocks the "sunlight" of brahma (interestingly, that is the way that bhAskara [an early bhedAbheda commentator on the brahmasUtras] interprets "hiraNma\'yena pA\'treNa satya\'syA\'pihitaM mu\'kham").
P.S.: By trolling here, you're kind of concomitantly making other Pakistanis like me look bad, so please don't...shukriya
Bookmarks