In the Vishnu sahasra nama bhashya, Sri Bhagavatpada has cited a large number of passages to deny the five types of differences (that non-advaitins, especially Madhvas, admit in absolute terms). These are: jiveshvara bheda, jiva-jiva bheda, jiva-jaDa bheda, jaDa-jaDa bheda and jaDeshvara bheda. The images for these citations are presented in the file that can be downloaded here:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/rn2gdixzcw4kt8x/Negating_the_Five_Differences.pdf/file
Om Tat Sat
Names such as ‘Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva’ are mithyopadhika – Vishnu Puranam
In the Vishnu Sahasra Nama bhashya, Shankara cites a Vishnu Purana verse that brings about the identity of the Atman and Brahman:
भूतात्मा चेन्द्रियात्मा च प्रधानात्मा तथा भवान् ।
आत्मा च परमात्मा च त्वमेकः पञ्चधा स्थितः ।। ५-१८-५० ।।
Sridhara Swamin comments: Bhutatma – the form of the mahabhuta-s (the apanchikruta pancha bhutas), indriyatma – the form of the indiryas of the jiva, pradhanatma – the form of prakriti, Atma – the jiva who is having the first three as upadhis, and Paramatma, the Supreme Self. Brahman alone is appearing as all these five types of ‘Atman-s’.
The very next verse there is:
प्रसीद सर्व्व सर्व्वात्मन् क्षराक्षरमयेश्वर ।
ब्रह्म-विष्णु-शिव्राद्याभिः कल्पनाभिरुदीरितः ।। ५-१८-५१ ।।
O Lord who is verily the kshara and akshara (perishable and imperishable in creation), the Self-of-All, the one called by the names such as Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, etc.which are mere imaginary ones.
Sridhara Swamin comments: ….कल्पनाभिः गुणोपाधिब्रह्मादिसंज्ञाभिः उद्रीरितः |
[You are called by the imaginary names such as Brahmaa (Vishnu and Shiva, etc)., that are based on gunas (such rajas, sattva and tamas).]
From the above we conclude:
The Vishnu of the Purana and scriptures is Turiya Vishnu
The Trimurtis are mere names such as Brahma, Vishnu, etc.
They are all based on the three gunas: sattva, etc.
There are no real entities such as Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, and others too.
The Turiya Vishnu is beyond all gunas.
Not even sattva is the default guna of the Turiya Vishnu (which the uninformed take to be so)
The Turiya Vishnu is non-different from the Trimurtis.
Even Vishnu of the Trimurtis is only kalpita name/form/sattva guna
The Turiya Vishnu has no real default name.
Such is the nature of the Vedantinc Brahman that Shankara and Advaitins alone can appreciate.
The above idea is anathema for non-advaitins. Wherever Shankara specifies Narayana/Vishnu/Vasudeva as Brahman/Jagatkaranam, such an entity is non-different from the Trimurtis. This idea too is not admissible to non-advaitins for whom a paricchinna Vishnu/Narayana who is ever different/distinct from Brahma and Rudra alone can be jagatkaranam. On this very count, for Shankara, such a Vishnu is disqualified to be the jagatkaranam. Vastu paricchinnatva is not there for Brahman according to Shankara.
Om Tat Sat
In the Vishnu Puranam occurs the concept of ‘no name being possible for Brahman’:
न यत्र नाथ विद्यन्ते नामजात्यादिकल्पनाः ।
तदू ब्रह्म परमं नित्यमविकारि भवानजः ।। ५-१८-५३ ।।
O Lord, where name, genus, etc. imaginations are not there, that Supreme Brahman is immutable, unborn, are You.
This very idea has been stated by Shankara in the BGB 13.12:
ज्ञेयं यत्तत्प्रवक्ष्यामि यज्ज्ञात्वामृतमश्नुते ।
अनादिमत्परं ब्रह्म न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते ॥ १२ ॥
सर्वो हि शब्दः अर्थप्रकाशनाय प्रयुक्तः, श्रूयमाणश्च श्रोतृभिः, जातिक्रियागुणसम्बन्धद्वारेण सङ्केतग्रहणसव्यपेक्षः अर्थं प्रत्याययति ; न अन्यथा, अदृष्टत्वात् । तत् यथा — ‘गौः’ ‘अश्वः’ इति वा जातितः, ‘पचति’ ‘पठति’ इति वा क्रियातः, ‘शुक्लः’ ‘कृष्णः’ इति वा गुणतः, ‘धनी’ ‘गोमान्’ इति वा सम्बन्धतः । न तु ब्रह्म जातिमत् , अतः न सदादिशब्दवाच्यम् । नापि गुणवत् , येन गुणशब्देन उच्येत, निर्गुणत्वात् । नापि क्रियाशब्दवाच्यं निष्क्रियत्वात् ‘निष्कलं निष्क्रियं शान्तम्’ (श्वे. उ. ६ । १९) इति श्रुतेः । न च सम्बन्धी, एकत्वात् । अद्वयत्वात् अविषयत्वात् आत्मत्वाच्च न केनचित् शब्देन उच्यते इति युक्तम् ; ‘यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते’ (तै. उ. २ । ९ । १) इत्यादिश्रुतिभिश्च ॥ १२ ॥One may consult the Swami Gambhirananda or any other translation.
For the following verse there, Sridhara Swamin says:
न कल्पनामृतेऽर्थस्य सर्व्वस्याधिगमो यतः ।
ततः कृष्णाच्युतानन्तबिष्णुसंज्ञाभिरीडयसे ।। ५-१८-५४ ।।
Without imagination, no sense can be grasped. Therefore, You are praised by names such as Krishna, Achyuta, Anantha, Vishnu….
Commentary: मायया अनन्तनामत्वमाह – The Lord gets infinite names by maayaa.
Om Tat Sat
Extract from the commentary by Svāmī Rāmabhadrācārya
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambhadracharya
on BG 18.41 (brāhmaṇakṣatriyaviśāṃ …): Rāmabhadrācārya, Jagadguru Rāmānandācārya Svāmī (1998). Śrīmadbhagavadgītā saṃskṛtahindīśrīrāghavakṛpābhāṣyasahitā. Volume II. Citrakūṭa: Śrītulasīpīṭhasevānyāsa. pp. 471, 504–505 –
The Vaishnava Acharya says about the four varna-s being assigned four body-parts of Bhagavan as their source:
वस्तुतस्तु व्यापकोऽयं परमोदारो हिन्दूधर्मापरपर्यायः सनातनो नो वैदिको धर्मः। अत्र वर्णव्यवस्था शास्त्रीया किन्तु नेयं परस्परद्वेषहेतुः। अत्र हि वैदिकोऽयं मन्त्रवर्णो मयोदाह्रियते यं शातपथा धूपार्थं विनियुञ्जते—
ब्रा॒ह्म॒णो॒ऽस्य॒ मुख॑मासीद्बा॒हू रा॑ज॒न्यः॑ कृ॒तः।
ऊ॒रू तद॑स्य॒ यद्वैश्य॑ः प॒द्भ्या शू॒द्रो अ॑जायत॥
(शु॰य॰वा॰मा॰ ३१.११)
//भगवत आनन्दमयत्त्वात्तस्य सर्वाङ्गाणां पावनत्वेन मुखस्योत्कृष्टत्वं पदयोश्चापकृष्टत्वं इति तु वक्तुं न शक्यते। //
[Since Bhagavan is Anandamaya, embodiment of Bliss, his entire body-parts being pure, it cannot be said that his mouth is exalted and the feet are lowly.]
In the Hindi translation of the above it is said: भगवान् के सभी अङ्ग आनन्दमय हैं इसलिए मुख से उत्पन्न हुए ब्राह्मण की अपेक्षा चरण से उत्पन्न हुआ शूद्र अपवित्र है यह कहना अत्यन्त भ्रम है।
[Bhagavan’s all body-parts are Bliss, anandamaya. Therefore it is complete delusion to say that ‘compared to the pure Brahmana who has come from the mouth of the Lord, the shudra who has come from the feet of the Lord is impure’.]
This logic is welcome and applies with full force to the following:
https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/2016/12/28/poor-srihari/
In the svarga khaṇḍa (62.2-7) there is this imagery of identifying the various Purāṇa-s with the various body-parts of Viṣṇu:
ब्राह्मं मूर्धा हरेरेव ह्रदयं पद्मसंज्ञकम्॥
वैष्णवं दक्षिणो बाहुः शैवं वामो महेशितुः । ऊरू भागवतं प्रोक्तं नाभिः स्यान्नारदीयकम्॥
मार्कण्डेयं च दक्षांघ्रिर्वामो ह्याग्नेयमुच्यते । भविष्यं दक्षिणो जानुर्विष्णोरेव महात्मन: ॥
ब्रह्मवैवर्तसंज्ञं तु वामजानुरुदाहृतः। लैङ्गं तु गुल्फकं दक्षं वाराहं वामगुल्फकम् ॥
स्कान्दं पुराणं लोमानि त्वगस्य वामनं स्मृतम् । कौर्मं पृष्ठं समाख्यातं मात्स्यं मेदः प्रकीर्तितम् ॥
मज्जा तु गारुडं प्रोक्तं ब्रह्माण्डमस्थि गीयते । एवमेवाभवद्विष्णुः पुराणावयवो हरिः ॥
(- पद्मपुराण, स्वर्गखण्ड , ६२।२-७)
[Brahma Purāṇa is said to be the ‘forehead’ of Śrī Hari, the Padma Purāṇa is said to be the ‘heart’ of Śrī Hari, theViṣṇu Purāṇa is said to be the ‘right arm’ of Śrī Hari. The Śiva Purāṇa is said to be the ‘left arm’ of Śrī Hari. The Śrīmad Bhāgavata is said to be his ‘thigh’, the Nārada Purāṇa is said to be his ‘navel’, The Mārkaṇḍeya Purāṇa is said to be his ‘right-foot’. The Agni Purāṇa is said to be his ‘left foot’, the Bhaviṣya Purāṇa is said to be his ‘right-knee’, the Brahma Vaivrata Purāṇa is said to be his ‘left-knee’. The Liṅga Purāṇa is said to be his ‘right ankle’,
the Varāha Purāṇa is said to be his ‘left ankle’, the Skanda Purāṇa is said to be the hair on the body of Śrī Hari’. The Vāmana Purāṇa is said to be his ‘skin’. The Kūrma Purāṇa is said to be his ‘back’. The Matsya Purāṇa is said to be his ‘stomach’. The Garuḍa Purāṇa is said to be his ‘bone-marrow’. The Brahmāṇḍa Purāṇa is said to be his ‘bone’.[Padma Purāṇa, svarga khaṇḍa (62.2-7)]
A fall out of the above: [Read the full article in the above link]
However, when one attempts to identify some purāṇa-s in the above imagery as ‘tāmasa’, then the tragic scenario unfolds.When all those body-parts of Śrī Hari that are identified with those particular tāmasa purāṇa-s, then the unfortunate, unpleasant and unavoidable situation of those body-parts being tāmasic arises. While the very purpose of taking up this ‘puraṇa-form’ is to enable an aspirant to worship, contemplate, the Lord as endowed with loveable, adorable, body-parts, the purāṇa classification into sattva, rajas and tamas, plays spoilsport. The damage is not yet over. Since it is admitted by those who subscribe to this tri-classification that even the so-called sattva purāṇa-s are not entirely sattva but have their quota of tamas, there is no way that even a single body-part of Śrī Hari is not ‘cancerous’. The only solace, if at all, is that while some parts that are matched with sattva purāṇa-s are ‘benign’, the rest of the parts are ‘malignant.’ Such is the pitiable state the Lord Śrī Hari stands reduced to by the protagonists of the purāṇa-tri-classification.
In this scenario, the logic stated by the Vaishnava Acharya that //’Bhagavan’s all body-parts are Bliss, anandamaya. Therefore it is complete delusion to say that ‘compared to the pure Brahmana who has come from the mouth of the Lord, the shudra who has come from the feet of the Lord is impure’// applies to the unvedic idea of classification of Puranas as sattva, etc. and exposes the untenability of such a classification.
Om Tat Sat
The ‘Vishnu’ of Shankara and that of Ramanuja
Here is an article, of 11 pages, which is a short study based on literary evidence from the writings of both Shankara and Ramanuja that shows the idea of ‘Vishnu’ is different for both these Acharyas. This article is not intended to invoke polemical discussions. The sole aim is to bring to the fore the fact of fundamental difference in the perspectives of both the Acharyas with regard to the concept of ‘Vishnu’.
The download link is:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/mo3ni2pg3o6e2tr/Vishnu_of_Shankara_and_Ramanuja.pdf/file
warm regards
Siddhanta Traya Sarah is a unique book that renders the three siddhanta-s namely Advaita, Vishishtadvaita and Dvaita in a condensed form. MM Sri R.Krishnamurthy Sastrigal has compiled, rather translated from the originals, in Tamil for the benefit of those who cannot approach the three doctrines in their original form.
Swami Vidyaranya’s ‘Vaiyasika Nyaya maalaa’ which gives in verse form the essence of each adhikaraNam of the Brahma sutras is the source for the Advaita section.
Vidwan Kapisthalam Sri Desikachar’s ‘shaariraka adhikarana ratnaavali’ is the source for the section on Vishishtadvaita.
Sri Raghavendra Tirtha’s ‘Nyaya Muktavali’ is the source book for the Dvaita siddhanta section in this book.
The book is unique in this respect that it offers in one book, of 500 plus pages in Tamil, an overview of the three doctrines.
The attached 13 images contain the commendation letters of Vidwan Mani Dravid Sastrigal in Sanskrit, Vidwan K.E.Devanathan’s Tamil article on his appreciation of the rendering of the Vishishtadvaita section (by pointing out some ten instances where the author’s excellence is very noteworthy) and Dr.Haridasa Bhatta’s letter in Sanskrit is a note of commendation for the Dvaita section and the entire book. The blurb has a profile of Sri Krishnamurthy Sastrigal.
Sri Krishnamurthy Sastrigal’s note tracing the genesis of the book and its completion scans several interesting incidents, in Tamil.
As several persons have suggested that the book deserves a translation into English and Kannada and perhaps Telugu and Hindi, I request those who can take up this work, from the three doctrines, to come forward. This way, the burden will get distributed. Those who are interested may kindly contact me off line to discuss the modalities.
I request members who know Tamil to kindly buy this invaluable book which is available at a subsidised price of Rs.300. The book, hard-bound, is very elegantly produced. Each siddhanta is printed in a different color. Copies can be had at the residence of Sri Krishnamurthi Sastrigal, close to the Madras Sanskrit College, Mylapore, Chennai 600 004.
Here is the link to the book release function held at Chennai where a summary of the Brahmasutra bhashya according to Advaita and Vishishtadvaita has been delivered by Vidwans Sri Mani Dravid Sastrigal and Sri K.E.Devanathan in Tamil. Dr.Haridas Bhatta (Dvaita vedanta) could not be present at the function due to personal reasons. Prof.K.Ramasubramanian (esteemed member of BVP), the illustrious son of Sri Krishnamurthy Sastrigal, has given the introductory talk. It is a very enjoyable function in deed:
Kindly share the information with all those who are interested in the Book.
See the images uploaded as a file in this link: https://groups.google.com/forum/…
warm regards
महाभारतम्-13-अनुशासनपर्व-045
https://sa.wikisource.org/s/31y
[The following section is present in the newly brought out ‘Vaishnava paatha’ of the Mahabharata from the Palimaaru (Madhva) maTha.]
In the Aanushasana parva of the Mahabharata, the Chapter 45 contains a description of the various aspects of Brahman. Uma, the consort of Shiva, explains the jagatkaaraNatva, paratva, etc. of Shiva. In this discourse, a number of core Vedantic doctrinal aspects are brought out by the Vedantin commentator NilakanTha.
| दुर्विज्ञेयो महादेवो दुराधारो दुरन्तकः। दुराबाधश्च दुर्ग्राह्यो दुर्द्दश्यो ह्यकृतात्मभिः।। Ambaa, the consort of Shiva, says: Mahadeva is extremely difficult to be realized. NilakanTha’s (N) comments: It is difficult to know even through the shaastra. Even if known through the scripture, it is difficult to retain in the manas (duraadhaaraH). Even if retained in the manas, owing to the obstacles such as laya, vikshepa, etc. (detailed in the Yoga shaastra and Gaudapada Karikaa), one is battered. There are mischievous bondages (durantakaH) and owing to the engrossment in heavenly pleasures, He is durgraahya, extremely difficult to be grasped owing to the lack of supreme vairagyam. And even in the presence of vairagya, dispassion, He is difficult to be perceived, durdrshyah. Just as there are obstacles with regard to Atman contemplation such as laya, etc. there is the possibility of laya, etc. even with regard to prakriti (prakriti laya). | |
| यस्य रूपाण्यनेकानि प्रवदन्ति मनीषिणः। स्थानानि च विचित्राणि प्रासादाश्चाप्यनेकशः।। His forms are countless, say the Knowers. His abodes too are wonderful and His temples too are many. N says: Having stated His nirvisheSha nature in the earlier verse, His savisheSha forms are being stated now. | |
| को हि तत्त्वेन तद्वेद ईशस्य चरितं शुभम्। कृतवान्यानि रूपाणि देवदेवः पुरा किल। क्रीडते च तथा शर्वः प्रसीदति यथाच वै।। Who indeed has known in truth the Lord’s auspicious exploits and His forms the Lord of lords assumed in the past!! And the way Sharva plays and delights!! | |
| हृदिस्थः सर्वभूतानां विश्वरूपो महेश्वरः। भक्तानामनुकम्पार्थं दर्शनं च यथाश्रुतम्। मुनीनां ब्रुवतां दिव्यमीशानचरितं शुभम्।। Maheshwara, the vishvarupa, the whole creation is his form, resides in the heart of all beings. He gives darshanam to his devotees out of compassion. | |
| कृतवान्यानि रूपाणि कथितानि दिवौकसैः। अनुग्रहार्थं विप्राणां शृणु वत्स समासतः।। | |
| तानि ते कीर्तयिष्यामि यन्मां त्वं परिपृच्छसि।। N says: It is for the sake of blessing the devotee that Brahman, even though devoid of any form, takes a form. [This is in correspondence with Shankara’s words: स्यात्परमेश्वरस्यापि इच्छावशात् मायामयं रूपं साधकानुग्रहार्थम् । (1.1.vii.20) (Ishwara, out of compassion, takes on, by His Maya, a form to grace the spiritual aspirant.) [The context in the BSB is that Brahman is devoid of any form but takes up forms to help the aspirant. In the Kenopanishad bhashya too Shankara lists several deities Vishnu, Ishvara, Indra, Prana, etc. as upasya as Brahman] ब्रह्मविष्णुसुरेन्द्राणां रुद्रादित्याश्विनामपि। विश्वेषामपि देवानां वपुर्धारयते भवः।। [Bhava takes the form of gods such as Brahma, Vishnu, Indra, Rudras, Adityas, Ashvini-s, etc.] N says: All forms right from that of Brahmaa are that of Shiva. | |
| नराणां देवनारीणां तथा प्रेतपिशाचयोः। किरातशबराणां च जलजानामनेकशः।। Humans, the divine damsels, the ghosts, spirits, hunters, forest-dwellers, aquatic beings – all are His forms. | |
| करोति भगवान्रूपमाटव्यशबराण्यपि। कूर्मो मत्स्यस्तथा शङ्खः प्रवालाङ्कुरभूषणः।। The tortoise, first, the conch…etc. are his forms. N says: the Kurma and Matsya avataras are indicative of the other incarnations. Time is also Shiva alone. | |
| यक्षराक्षससर्पाणां दैत्यदानवयोरपि। वपुर्धारयते देवो भूयश्च बिलवासिनाम्।। | |
| व्याघ्रसिंहमृगाणां च तरक्ष्वृक्षपतत्त्रिणाम्। उलूकश्वशृगालानां रूपाणि कुरुतेऽपि च।। | |
| हंसकाकमयूराणां कृकलासकसारसाम्। रूपाणि च बलाकानां गृध्रचक्राङ्गयोरपि।। | |
| करोति वा स रूपाणि धारयत्यपि पर्वतम्। गोरूपं च महादेवो हस्त्यश्वोष्ट्रखराकृतिः।। | |
| छागशार्दूलरूपश्च अनेकमृगरूपधृक्। अण्डजानां च दिव्यानां वपुर्धारयते भवः।। | |
| दण्डी छत्री च कुण्डी च द्विजानां वारणस्तथा। षण्मुखो वै बहुमुखस्त्रिनेत्रो बहुशीर्षकः।। | |
| अनेककटिपादश्च अनेकोदरवक्त्रधृत्। अनेकपाणिपार्श्वश्च अनेकगपसंवृतः।। In the above verses the variety of forms of Shiva is listed. All beings of all kinds are He alone. The idea of ‘sahasra shirsha purusha,….’ is also depicted here. All hands, feet, stomachs, faces/mouths, are all His. We get a feeling of reading the Vishvarupa adhyaya of the Bhagavadgita. | |
| ऋषिगन्धर्वरूपश्च सिद्धचारणरूपधृत्। भस्पपाण्डुरगात्रश्च चन्द्रार्धकृतभूषणः।। | |
| अनेकरावसंघुष्टश्चानेकस्तुतिसंस्कृतः। सर्वभूतान्तकः सर्वः सर्वलोकप्रतिष्ठितः।। | |
| सर्वलोकान्तरात्मा च सर्वगः सर्ववाद्यपि। सर्वत्र भगवान्ज्ञेयो हृदिस्थः सर्वदेहिनाम्।। | |
| यो हि यं कामयेत्कामं यस्मिन्नर्थऽर्च्यते पुनः। तत्सर्वं वेत्ति देवेशस्तं प्रपद्य यदीच्छसि।। | |
| नन्दते कुप्यते चापि तथा हुंकारयत्यपि। चक्री शूली गदापाणिर्मुसली खड्गपट्टसी।। | |
| भूधरो नागमौञ्जी च नागकुण्डलकुण्डली। नागयज्ञोपवीती य नागचर्मोत्तरच्छदः।। | |
| हसते गायते चैव नृत्यते च मनोहरम्। वादयत्यपि वाद्यानि विचित्राणि गणैर्युतः।। | |
| वल्गते जृम्बते चैव रुदते रोदयत्यपि। उन्मत्तमत्तरूपं च भाषते चापि सुस्वरः।। | |
| अतीव हसते रौद्रस्त्रासयन्नयनैर्जनम्। जागर्ति चैव स्वपिति जृम्भते च यथासुवम्।। | |
| जपते जप्यते चैव तपते तप्यते पुनः। ददाति प्रतिगृह्णाति युञ्जते ध्यायतेऽपि च।। | |
| वेदीमध्ये तथा यूपे गोष्ठमध्ये हुताशने। दृश्यते दृश्यते चापि बालो वृद्धो युवा तथा।। | |
| क्रीडते ऋषिकन्याभिर्ऋषिपत्नीभिरेव च। ऊर्ध्वकेशो महाशेफो नग्नो विकृतलोचनः।। | |
| गौरः श्यामस्तथा कृष्णः पाण्डुरो धूमलोहितः। विकृताक्षो विशालाक्षो दिग्वासाः सर्ववासकः।। | |
| अरूपस्याद्यरूपस्य अतिरूपाद्यरूपिणः। अनाद्यन्तमजस्यान्तं वेत्स्यते कोस्य तत्त्वतः।। Who indeed can know the extent of the one who has no beginning and no end at all? The theme of Lingodbhava is hinted in these lines. | |
| हृदि प्राणो मनो जीवो योगात्मा योगसंज्ञितः। ध्यानं तत्परमात्मा च भावग्राह्यो महेश्वरः।। N says: Shiva alone is the pratyagaatmaa, the innermost true self of all jivas – this is stated by the word ‘hridi’ – in the heart. The five koshas are being stated by the words hridi, etc. annamaya, pranamaya, manomaya, vijnana and the term Yogatma is the blending of chit and achit that is the ananda maya kosha. [Advaitins hold that the Anandamaya kosha is the seat of karana shariram, ignorance.] The word Yogasamjnitah means the one who is free of the five koshas, the tvam padaartha, the innermost essence of the jiva. The word ‘dhyanam’ shows the means to arrive at the true self free of the koshas. The word Maheshwara is the mayavi, the weilder of maya (Shvetashvataropanishad mantra ‘maayaam tu prakritim vidyaat, maayinam tu maheshvaram’ is meant here) , the Tat padartha. ‘Bhaavagraahya’ means Brahman is grasped, realized, perceived by bhaava, contemplation culminating in the subtle akhandakara vritti. Is it grasped as an object, knowable? No, it is verily the subject, pratyagaatmaa. By this verse, the mahavakya ‘ayam atma brahma’ (mandukya upanishad, atharva veda) is indicated. | |
| वादको गायनश्चैव सहस्रशतलोचनः। The musical instrument players and the songs/singers are also Shiva, Brahman alone. N cites the mantra ‘brahma daasaah, brahma daashaah’ which means ‘Brahman is the slaves, the gamblers/fishermen…’ which Shankara has cited in the Brahma sutra bhashya 2.3.43: तथा ह्येके शाखिनो दाशकितवादिभावं ब्रह्मण आमनन्त्याथर्वणिका ब्रह्मसूक्ते — ‘ ब्रह्म दाशा ब्रह्म दासा ब्रह्मैवेमे कितवाः’ इत्यादिना ; दाशा य एते कैवर्ताः प्रसिद्धाः, ये च अमी दासाः स्वामिष्वात्मानमुपक्षपयन्ति, ये च अन्ये कितवा द्यूतकृतः, ते सर्वे ब्रह्मैव — इति हीनजन्तूदाहरणेन सर्वेषामेव नामरूपकृतकार्यकरणसङ्घातप्रविष्टानां जीवानां ब्रह्मत्वमाह ; तथा अन्यत्रापि ब्रह्मप्रक्रियायामेवायमर्थः प्रपञ्च्यते — ‘ त्वं स्त्री त्वं पुमानसि त्वं कुमार उत वा कुमारी । त्वं जीर्णो दण्डेन वञ्चसि त्वं जातो भवति विश्वतोमुखः’ (श्वे. उ. ४ । ३) इति, ‘ सर्वाणि रूपाणि विचित्य धीरो नामानि कृत्वाभिवदन्यदास्ते’ इति च ; ‘ नान्योऽतोऽस्ति द्रष्टा’ (बृ. उ. ३ । ७ । २३) इत्यादिश्रुतिभ्यश्च अस्यार्थस्य सिद्धिः । चैतन्यं च अविशिष्टं जीवेश्वरयोः, यथाग्निविस्फुलिङ्गयोरौष्ण्यम् । Shankara says above: These Upanishadic passages declare that all forms of all beings, even the lowly ones, is of Brahman alone thereby bringing out the jiveshvara aikya. N paraphrases the above in the MB commentary. एकवक्त्रो द्विवक्त्रश्च त्रिवक्त्रोऽनेकवक्त्रकः।। N explains here: One-face is the praajnaa of the third paada stated in the Mandukya upanishad: ह्यानन्दभुक्चेतोमुखः प्राज्ञस्तृतीयः पादः | Two-faced is: the taijasa which comprises of the sukshma sharira and the jiva. Three-faced refers to the earlier two plus the gross body. That way all the three states are covered by this shloka in the MB. | |
| तद्भक्तस्तद्गतो नित्यं तन्निष्ठस्तत्परायणः। The devotee of Shiva is stated here: He is completely taken over by devotion, and reminds us of the Bh.Gita 5.17: expression: तद्बुद्धयस्तदात्मानस्तन्निष्ठास्तत्परायणाः । गच्छन्त्यपुनरावृत्तिं ज्ञाननिर्धूतकल्मषाः ॥ १७ ॥ [Those who are given to the complete devotion, in intellect, manas, and totally His alone, go to the state of liberation never to return to samsara by the Jnana that purifies them of all defects.] Thus we find here in this small section, as a sample, Veda Vyasa teaching the Paratvam of Shiva just as he has done in several places the Paratvam of Vishnu. The core Vedantic teachings embedded in the above verses are brought out eminently by NilakanTha, the advaitin. भज पुत्र महादेवं ततः प्राप्स्यसि चेप्सितं।। Ambaa concludes: O son, pray to Mahadeva and you will certainly get what you have desired. Om Tat Sat |
Was Bhishma ashamed of speaking of the glories and 1000 names of Shiva?
Sri Vadiraja Tirtha (of the Madhva school), in his ‘Lakshalankara’, a commentary on the Mahabharata, says that Bhishma, feeling ashamed of narrating the glories of Shiva, turned to Krishna to do the same when Yudhishthira sought to know Shiva’s glories and the 1000 names.
In this article this topic is discussed:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/c5pi6zwlqzhbnr9/Was_Bhishma_ashamed_to_speak_of_the_glories_and_1000_names_of_Shiva.pdf/file
regards
The ‘Naaraayaneeyam’ is extremely famous as a devotional discourse authored by the Advaitin Sri Narayana Bhatta of Kerala. The object of stuti in this work is Lord Sri Krishna, the presiding deity of the famous temple at Guruvayoor, Kerala.
To the uninitiated it might appear that this is the very same Vishnu who is held to be the Brahman by sectarian schools. However, a proper study of the work with the help of the commentaries would reveal that the Brahman of this text is fundamentally different and opposed to the god of the non-advaitins.
For the Vedantin, Brahman is the one that takes, out of Maya and its three gunas, the three forms of the Trimurtis, it is also immanent in and transcends the Trimurtis. Brahman is non-different from the Trimurtis who are its own essential manifestations. Such an idea is anathema and reprehensible for the bhakti schools which maintain an absolute difference across the Trimurtis. Their Brahman, in the view of the Vedantin is a finite one, being subject to vastu-pariccheda.
In this verse of the 90th dashaka, the author says:http://www.narayaneeyam-firststep.org/dashaka90.html
वृकभृगुमुनिमोहिन्यम्बरीषादिवृत्ते-
ष्वयि तव हि महत्त्वं सर्वशर्वादिजैत्रम् ।
स्थितमिह परमात्मन् निष्कलार्वागभिन्नं
किमपि यदवभातं तद्धि रूपं तवैव ॥१॥
O Supreme Being! The episodes of Vrikaasura, Sage Bhrigu, Thy Mohini Avataar and the Ambareesh episode only proves, here, that Thy majesty and superiority supersedes over all other deities like Shiva and others.Thou are non-different from Thy Nishkala (partless) form and Thy Sakala (part) forms like Shiva, Brahamaa, and shine in an indescribable manner as the essence of all.
The above verse holds that not only Brahman is Nishkalam, Nirgunam, but also non-different from its sakala, saguna, forms. The word ‘abhinnam’ in the verse shows that. This abhinnatvam is vehemently denied by non-advaitic schools.
What is even more, it is the very same One Brahman that obtains as the Trimurti-s in their respective regions that are collectively called Satyaloka. This is being stated in the next verse:
मूर्तित्रयेश्वरसदाशिवपञ्चकं यत्
प्राहु: परात्मवपुरेव सदाशिवोऽस्मिन् ।
तत्रेश्वरस्तु स विकुण्ठपदस्त्वमेव
त्रित्वं पुनर्भजसि सत्यपदे त्रिभागे ॥२॥
The Shaivaas speak of five aspects with Brahmaa Vishnu Shiva Ishwara and Sadaashiva. Here Sadaashiva is Thy own self the Supreme Being. Thou alone are Ishwara the Lord of Vaikuntha. The three forms of Trinity, Thou alone assume in the three parts of Satyaloka.
The above idea of Sadashiva being verily non-different from Vishnu is unacceptable to non-advaitins. Also, the idea of One Brahman being the resident of the three aspects of the Satya loka is also not admissible to them. Only the Vedantin, based on the Turiya of the Mandukya Upanishad will be able to state the above.
Narayana Bhatta stresses the idea of Murti-traya repeatedly:
तत्रापि सात्त्विकतनुं तव विष्णुमाहु-
र्धाता तु सत्त्वविरलो रजसैव पूर्ण: ।
सत्त्वोत्कटत्वमपि चास्ति तमोविकार-
चेष्टादिकञ्च तव शङ्करनाम्नि मूर्तौ ॥३॥
The form of Vishnu, among the Trimuti, is a manifestation of pure Sattva. Brahmaa is the manifestation of abundance of Rajas with a trace of Sattva. Whereas, Thy form known as Shankara has an abundance of Sattva but Tamas expresses itself in its activities.
The above statement of Vishnu/Brahman manifesting the tamas and rajas as Shiva and Brahma is rejected by non-advaitins as their concept of Brahman which is a deity, cannot be depicted as endowed with tamas and rajas. This also distinguishes at the very root the Vishnu of Narayana Bhatta from the deity of the vaishnava sects.
The idea of Brahman transcending the Trimurtis is stated here:
तं च त्रिमूर्त्यतिगतं परपूरुषं त्वां
शर्वात्मनापि खलु सर्वमयत्वहेतो: ।
शंसन्त्युपासनविधौ तदपि स्वतस्तु
त्वद्रूपमित्यतिदृढं बहु न: प्रमाणम् ॥४॥
Thou do transcend the Trinity and are the Supreme Being. The word ‘trimurtyatigatam’ says this. Thou are the essence of all and Shaivas worship Thee alone as Shiva with worshiping norms, as described. That too is Thy form alone. We have many proofs in support of this truth.
A Vishnu who is above another Vishnu is not admissible in non-advaitic schools. Shankara in his Vishnu Sahasra Nama bhashya has commented upon the term ‘Keshava’ with an etymological meaning, alternatively, as ‘He under whose control exist Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva.’ It is this ‘Turiya Vishnu/Keshava’ that is taught by Veda Vyasa in the Mahabharatha as “Satyam Satyam punah Satyam Uddhrtya bhujam uchayate . Vedaat Sastram Param naasti na daivam Kesavaat param”
Vishnu being under the control of another Vishnu is not admitted by anyone but Shankara.
Thus, the above sample citations from the Narayaniyam prove beyond doubt that the concept of ‘Vishnu’ as Brahman is totally different between Advaitins and non-Advaitins.
See also:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/qm4ifz4kavff61i/Hari_Hara_abheda..Narayaneeyam_F.pdf/file
http://www.mediafire.com/file/mo3ni2pg3o6e2tr/Vishnu_of_Shankara_and_Ramanuja.pdf/file
warm regards
Selections from ‘Gaathaa Saptashati’ – Shiva performs Sandhya Vandanam
// Gatha Saptasati
The book Gahasattasai in Prakrit, is more popularly known as Gatha Saptasati in Sanskrit. It is also known as Gahakosa which is a collection of 700 Maharashtri Prakrit lyric and exotic verses par excellence. Since Prakrit had been a dialect of the masses, it was supposed to have a better emotional appeal than Sanskrit. This work contains the best selected lyrical poems, independent, unconnected with each other, full of meaning, abounding in suggestive or figurative speech rather than in laksana and abhidha, with depth of emotional feelings. It is not a small wonder that Prakrit poetic composition had reached such a peak in the first or second century A.D.The compiler of Gahasattasai is Hala, the Kavi-vatsala (literally ‘affectionate’ towards the poet), who was the lord of Kuntala janapada.Hala, the sixteenth ruler of the Satavahana line reigned sometime during the first half of 1st c.A.D. So, the social picture of culture and civilization which was revealed in the GathaSaptasati may be regarded as relating approximately between 2nd c.B.C. and 2nd c. A.D.
….The popularity of the love songs of this anthology is revealed by the fact that it had at least six versions and eighteen commentaries. Jain authors also have commented on it. //
The work is an expression of the Sringara Rasa.
In this compilation, of some 2000 years old, the first verse is about Shiva performing the morning Sandhya vandanam.
Beginning of the work: praatah sandhyaa of Shiva: In the first 100:
http://www.sanskrit.nic.in/ASSP/gatha_sapatshati/6frame3.htm
पशुपते रोषारुणप्रतिमासङ्क्रान्तगौरीमुखचन्द्रम्।
गृहीतार्घपङ्कजमिव सन्ध्यासलिलाञ्जलिं नमत।।
Obeisance to Pashupati’s anjali (arghya) which is like a red lotus blooming upon the moon shining. The simile is: In the arghya water in Shiva’s hands, his face is reflecting. This is akin to a lotus bud. On that reflection, Gowri’s moon-like face is getting reflected. The effect is: the lotus bud is blossoming.
While the book starts with this mangala shloka, it ends with the scene of Shiva performing the evening sandhya vandanam.
In the second 100 we have a similar depiction of Lakshmi-Narayana in sringaara rasa:
http://www.sanskrit.nic.in/ASSP/gatha_sapatshati/6frame4.htm
तं नमत यस्य वक्षसि लक्ष्मीमुखं कौस्तुभेऽभिसङ्क्रान्तम्।
मृगहीनं शशिबिम्बं विलोक्यते सूर्यबिम्ब इव।।५१।।१
The Sringara rasa is demonstrated with Lakshmi and Narayana. Obeisance to Narayana in whose Kaustubha gem (on his chest), the face of Lakshmi is reflected. It is as though a moon devoid of the deer-mark in it is getting reflected in the sun.
विपरीतरतावस्थायां यस्य वक्षसि कौस्तुभे मणौ अभिसङ्क्रान्तं प्रतिबिम्बितं लक्ष्मीमुखं सूर्यबिम्बेऽनुसङ्क्रान्तं मृगपरिहीनं निष्कलङ्कं शशिबिम्बमिव दृश्यते, तं नमतेत्यर्थ:। भगवन्तौ लक्ष्मीनारायणावपि परस्परप्रेमानुबन्धसुन्दरं बन्धविशेषबन्धुरं च सुरतसुखमुपभुञ्जाते, किमन्ये संसारिण इति नायकौ प्रति स्वाकूतमभिसूच्यते
In the fourth 100: Lakshmi, during the samudra mathanam, even as she emerges from the ocean, being looked at by the Deva-s with the longing as to ‘who will be her consort?’. is stated as an upamaa:
http://www.sanskrit.nic.in/ASSP/gatha_sapatshati/6frame6.htm
प्रेक्षन्तेऽनिमिषाक्षा: पथिका हलिकस्य पिष्टपाण्डुरिताम्।
दुहितरं दुग्धसमुद्रोत्तरल्लक्ष्मीमिव सतृष्णा:।
अनिमिषनयना देवा दुग्धसमुद्रादुत्तरन्तीमत एव पाण्डुरितां लक्ष्मीं यथापश्यन् तथा सतृष्णा: सलालसा: पथिका: पिष्टेन तण्डुलगोधूमादिचूर्णेन पाण्डुरितां हालिकस्य तनयाम-निमिषा: सन्त: प्रेक्षन्ते। तथा च-अस्माक मध्ये कस्य वा भवेल्लाभसौभाग्यमिति यथा तेऽचिन्तयं-स्तथैतेऽपीति पथिकौत्सुक्येन हालिकसुताया: सौन्दर्यातिशयो ध्वन्यते। ‘हालिकसुतामपि सतृष्णं पश्यतामेषां गृहे वासो न देय:’ इति सुहृदं प्रति नागरिकस्योक्तिरिति केचित्।
In the fifth 100:
सन्ध्यासमये जलपूरिताञ्जलिं विघटितैकवामकरम्।
गौर्यै हि कोषपानोद्यतमिव नमत प्रमथनाथम्।।४८।।१
Obeisance to Shiva who, during the sandhya time, with his two hands full of water to be offered as arghyam, is thwarted by the left hand being drawn away in the manner of Gowri (who resides in his left side) is wanting to drink from the vessel-like hand. Now, Shiva remains with just the right hand full of water as though he is doing aachamanam.
सन्ध्यानुष्ठानसमये। जलेन पूरितोऽञ्जलिर्यस्य तम् किन्तु विघटितैकवामकरम्, विघट्टित: पृथग्भूत: एको वाम: करो यस्य। अर्धनारीश्वरत्वेन वामभागस्थितगौरीकस्यापि सन्ध्यासमये गौरीसम्बन्धी वाम: कर: पृथग्भूत इत्यर्थ:। एकस्मिन् हस्ते आचमनार्थं गृहीतसलिलमिति यावत्। गौर्यै गौर्या: कृते कोषपानरूपं दिव्यं कर्तुमुद्यतमिव प्रमथनाथं शिवं नमत।
In the sixth 100:
http://www.sanskrit.nic.in/ASSP/gatha_sapatshati/6frame7.htm
बलेर्वाचाबन्धे आश्चर्यं निपुणत्वं च प्रकटयन्।
सुरसार्थकृतानन्दो वामनरूपो हरिर्जयति।।
Hari, in the form of Vamana, is victorious since he, with mere control of speech, won over Bali and the entire heavenly world.
वामनरूपधारी हरिर्जयति। वाङ्नियमनमात्रेण स्वर्गराज्यं बलेराहृतवानेवं किल तन्नैपुण्यमित्यन्यावतारापेक्षया स एव सर्वोत्कर्षेण वर्तते इति वाच्योऽर्थ:। अनुरणनेन तु- बलिनो बलवतो गृहजनस्य वाचया वचनेन निरुत्तरीकरणे नैपुण्यं प्रकटयन्, सुष्ठु रसार्थवद्भिर्वचनैर्जनिताखिलप्रीति: वामनरूपो न्यग्भावितात्मा अवसरमभिलक्ष्य विनयमुपगत इत्यर्थ:। एतादृशो हरि: परदारापहारी स ते कामुको जयतीति ध्वन्यमानोऽर्थ:
Rudra’s three eyes:
रतिकेलिहृतनिवसनकरकिसलयरुद्धनयनयुगलस्य।
रुद्रस्य तृतीयनयनं पार्वतीपरिचुम्बितं जयति।।]
Here, the poetic comparison of the three-eye phenomenon which is really ferocious, as in the destruction of the Tripura-s (asuras), is of no use in the soft love with Girija, the daughter of Himavan. Hence, the original word ‘Rudra’ has been replaced by the word ‘Shambhu’ (he who bestows jou, ‘sham’):
रतिसम्भ्रमहृतनिवसनकरकिसलयरुद्धनयनयुगलस्य।
शम्भोस्तृतीयनयनं गिरिजापरिचुम्बितं जयति।।५५।।१
[The third, ferocious eye, is caressed by Girija, in love]
अत्र गाथायाम्- रतौ रसावेशवशात्सञ्जातो य: सम्भ्रमस्तद्वयात्पार्वत्या वसनमपनीतमिति शम्भो: कामावेगलोलतां ध्वनयितुं सम्भ्रमपदमुपात्तम्। यदि तु मूलपदाङ्कानुसरण एवाग्रहस्तर्हि- ‘रतिकेल्यपहृतनिवस.’ इत्यादि पाठ्यम्। मूलकारस्य रुद्रपदं तु-लोकत्रितयसंहारज्वलित-नेत्रज्वलनस्य भगवतो भर्गस्य भैरवतास्मारकं गिरीन्द्रनन्दिनीनिधुवनकेलिसमये सुतरामनुपयोगि, प्रत्युत रसमार्गविरोधीति शम्भुपदेन (शं रतानुकूल्यरूपं सुखं भावयतीति) परिवर्तितमिति तयोस्तारतम्यं सुधीभिरेवाकलनीयम्। पार्वतीगिरिजापदे तु समानार्थके एवेति न काचिद्विप्रति-पत्तिरित्यलमधिकसूक्ष्मविचारचर्चया।
End of the work: saayam sandhyaa of Shiva:
http://www.sanskrit.nic.in/ASSP/gatha_sapatshati/6frame9.htm
सन्ध्योपात्तजलाञ्जलिबिम्बितगौरीमुखाम्बुरुहम्।
स्फुरिताधरं मुधैव हि विगलितमन्त्रं हरं नमत।।१००।।
In this concluding verse, the Sandhya vandanam scene is enacted. Shiva, seeing the reflection of Gowri in the water in his hands, with his lips trembling overcome by love, is missing the mantras (to be chanted at that juncture).
Thus, in this extremely ancient work we see the depiction, even though in the context of Sringara rasa, of both the divine couples, Parvati-Parameshwara and Lakshmi-Narayana. Since the scene is Sandhyavandanam, Samudra mathanam, Vaamanaavataara, etc. which are all acceptable to vaidikas, we see that there have existed authors in the very distant past who have been votaries of both Shiva and Vishnu bhakti in equal measure. This reflects the theme of the Veda, Smritis, Mahabharata, Ramayana, etc. The tradition Shankaracharya handed down to humanity also has taken forward and nurtured to this day this very theme. We see this theme depicted in abundance in the works of Shankaracharya, be it the Vishnu Sahasra Nama Bhashyam or his vast stotra literature including the Prapancha saara.
Om Tat Sat
Satta trayam in shruti and sutras: Vidwan Mani Dravid Sastri and another scholar
Satyasya satyam: Paramarthika and vyavaharikam – Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2.1.20: सत्यस्य सत्यमिति (प्राणा वै सत्यं तेषामेष सत्यम्) ॥ २० ॥ [The first satyam in the mantra is vyavaharika and the second satyam is paramarthika. Same case with what is there within brackets too.
Taittiriya Upanishad II.6 : satyam cha anrutam cha satyam abhavat. Paramarthika Satyam became Vyavaharika (satyam) and Praatibhasika (anrutam). See this article for full details on this Taittiriya mantra: https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/2010/02/17/paramarthika-vyavaharika-satyam/
Mundakopanishat: We get to see all the three types of ‘satyam’ in this Upanishad:
Mantra : येनाक्षरं पुरुषं वेद सत्यं 1.2.13 Bhashyam: सत्यं तदेव परमार्थस्वाभाव्यादव्ययम् Here the word ‘satyam’ in the mantra refers to Paramarthika satyam.
Also in this mantra 2.1.1 तदेतत्सत्यं यथा सुदीप्तात्पावकाद्विस्फुलिङ्गाः the word ‘satyam’ refers to Paramarthika satyam. The Bhashyam: यदपरविद्याविषयं कर्मफललक्षणम् , सत्यं तदापेक्षिकम् । इदं तु परविद्याविषयम् , परमार्थसल्लक्षणत्वात् । तदेतत् सत्यं यथाभूतं विद्याविषयम् ; अविद्याविषयत्वाच्च अनृतमितरत् । अत्यन्तपरोक्षत्वात्कथं नाम प्रत्यक्षवत्सत्यमक्षरं प्रतिपद्येरन्निति दृष्टान्तमाह. In the beginning the word ‘satyam’ refers to the karma/karma phala that is stated to be vyavaharika (aapekshikam, relative reality) in the Mundaka 1.2.1. The word ‘satyam’ in the mantra 2.1.1 refers to paramarthika satyam, Brahman.
Sutra and bhashyam: Sutra 2.1.14: tadananyatvam aarambhana sabdaadibhyaH …..prapancha is mithya (vyavaharika) and brahman is paramarthika was established with the vacarambhana shruti (Chandogya).
3rd adhyaya: svapna: sutra 3.2.3 मायामात्रन्तु कार्त्स्नेनानभिव्यक्तस्वरूपत्वात्. In fact in the foregoing in the sutras itself the prapancha has been established as mithya. So, what remains to be inquired into now, in the 3rd adhyaya?
In vyavaharika itself a category is stated: pratibhasika
Regarding svapna, the Bhamati has very clearly said: just in order to specify the pratibhasika here the special inquiry is taken up: maayaamaatram…
Bhashyakara also has stated clearly here: this also is mithya alone but since vyavahara is going on uninterrupted we say it is satya (vyavaharika).
Thus the three types of satya are admitted by the Sutrakaara himself.
In the foregoing the Shruti and Sutra pramana for the satta traividhya is shown.
Om Tat Sat
Selections from Barhaspatya sutram
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barhaspatya_sutras
The Bārhaspatya-sūtras (a patronymic of Brhaspati), also Lokāyata (“materialistic”, “atheistic”) sutras is the foundational text of the Cārvāka school of materialist (nastika) philosophy.
Probably dating to the final centuries BC (the Mauryan period),[citation needed] this text has been lost, and is known only from fragmentary quotations.
This short selection highlights some of the vedic/religious practices that prevailed in the very ancient times:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/3tuv7jraq965yrh/Selections_from_Barhaspatya_sutram_A.pdf/file
Om Tat Sat
A good search possible in ‘Advaita shaaradaa’ resource
Namaste
It is well known to scholars/researchers/students that the entire core corpus of Advaita literature has been/being brought under the banner ‘Advaita Sharadaa’ of the Sringeri Sharada Peetham.
In this page https://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%81%E0%A4%96%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%AA%E0%A5%83%E0%A4%B7%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A0%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%8D/
one can see a large list of names of texts. It is possible to make a search for particular words in each of these texts, This facility will be of utmost help for students/researchers. Words like ‘mithyaa, adhyaasa, vivarta, aikyam, samucchaya, tattvamasi, moksha,…’ etc. can be searched in each of these works listed / displayed on the above page. In the ‘anveshanam’ head, on top of the above page as a menu, one can initiate a search across the entire prasthana traya Bhashya of Shankaracharya by choosing ‘sarvam’. Individual text search is also possible on that page. One can see the results delivered on another page as ‘phalitaamshah’ and copy the results for one’s further notes, articles, etc.
This excellent resource has been developed by Sri C.S.Yogananda and his team under the company name Sriranga Technologies, Mysuru. They are working hard to include more and more texts to the resource. The utility of the resource is immense indeed.
warm regards
Om Tat Sat
Drishti-srishti alluded to by Shankara
In the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4.3.31,32 the mantra says:
यत्र वा अन्यदिव स्यात्तत्रान्योऽन्यत्पश्येदन्योऽन्यज्जिघ्रेदन्योऽन्यद्रसयेदन्योऽन्यद्वदेदन्योऽन्यच्छृणुयादन्योऽन्यन्मन्वीतान्योऽन्यत्स्पृशेदन्योऽन्यद्विजानीयात् ॥ ३१ ॥
सलिल एको द्रष्टाद्वैतो भवत्येष …32
“When in the waking and dream states there is, as it were, another, then one can see the other, then one can smell the other, then one can speak to the other, then one can hear the other, then one can think of the other, then one can touch the other, then one can know the other.
32. “In deep sleep it becomes transparent like water, the witness, one and without a second. ..”
For the above, the bhashya is:
यत्र यस्मिन् जागरिते स्वप्ने वा अन्यदिव आत्मनो वस्त्वन्तरमिव अविद्यया प्रत्युपस्थापितं भवति, तत्र तस्मादविद्याप्रत्युपस्थापितात् अन्यः अन्यमिव आत्मानं मन्यमानः — असति आत्मनः प्रविभक्ते वस्त्वन्तरे असति च आत्मनि ततः प्रविभक्तेः, अन्यः अन्यत् पश्येत् उपलभेत ; तच्च दर्शितं स्वप्ने प्रत्यक्षतः — ‘घ्नन्तीव जिनन्तीव’ (बृ. उ. ४ । ३ । २०) इति । तथा अन्यः अन्यत् जिघ्रेत् रसयेत् वदेत् शृणुयात् मन्वीत स्पृशेत् विजानीयादिति ॥
यत्र पुनः सा अविद्या सुषुप्ते वस्त्वन्तरप्रत्युपस्थापिका शान्ता, तेन अन्यत्वेन अविद्याप्रविभक्तस्य वस्तुनः अभावात् , तत् केन कं पश्येत् जिघ्रेत् विजानीयाद्वा ।
Translation: Swami Madhavananda:
When, in the waking or dream state, there is something else besides the self, as it were, presented by ignorance, then one, thinking of oneself as different
from that something-although there is nothing different from the self, no! is there any self different from it can see something. This has been shown by a reference to one’s experience in the dream state in the passage, ‘As if he were being killed, or overpowered’ …
When, however, that ignorance which presents things other than the self is at rest, in that state of profound sleep, there being nothing separated from the
self by ignorance, what should one see, smell, or know, and through what?
This bhashya brings to the fore the perception of duality in waking and dream and the non-appearance of duality in deep sleep. So, perception is creation and non-perception is laya. What is to be noted here is that while the mantra never utters a word about jaagrat or sushupti, Shankara introduces the idea of jaagrat/svapna and sushupti.
The above is from the book ‘Sridakshinamurti stotram’ Vol.1, p. 213. The section there is: drishti-samasamayaa srishtih.
Om Tat Sat
In the Valmiki Ramayana there are many instances where the simile of Shiva/Rudra is used, just as the simile of Vishnu, Brahma, etc. are. In this
verse:
अनुयातौ श्रिया दीप्तौ शोभयेतामनिन्दितौ।
स्थाणुं देवमिवाचिन्त्यं कुमाराविव पावकी ।।1.22.10।।
[….As they followed sage Viswamitra spreading radiance, they looked like sons of the god of fire, (Skanda and Visakhu) following the incomprehensible Siva. ]
of the Baalakaanda there is an epithet ‘achintya’ used to denote the nature of Shiva, SthaaNu. This epithet is an Upanishadic one used as Svarupa lakshana for Brahman.
The article uploaded in this URL contains many similes with their context, etc.
The Vedantic references of the above simile are shown. They are useful for the Advaitic sadhaka.
http://www.mediafire.com/file/np3d7a7pw5rpnnc/Simile_of_Shiva_used_in_the_Valmiki_Ramayana.pdf/file
Om Tat Sat
Attaining a Devataa and Realizing the Devataa Tattva – Upaasya Brahman and Jneya Brahman
In the Kenopanishad Pada Bhashyam 1.5:
आत्मा हि नामाधिकृतः कर्मण्युपासने च संसारी कर्मोपासनं वा साधनमनुष्ठाय ब्रह्मादिदेवान्स्वर्गं वा प्राप्तुमिच्छति । तत्तस्मादन्य उपास्यो विष्णुरीश्वर इन्द्रः प्राणो वा ब्रह्म भवितुमर्हति, न त्वात्मा ; लोकप्रत्ययविरोधात् । यथान्ये तार्किका ईश्वरादन्य आत्मेत्याचक्षते, तथा कर्मिणोऽमुं यजामुं यजेत्यन्या एव देवता उपासते । तस्माद्युक्तं यद्विदितमुपास्यं तद्ब्रह्म भवेत् , ततोऽन्य उपासक इति ।
Shankara brings out some very crucial points in Vedanta:
In this purvapaksha, Shankara has clearly stated that those who hold Ishwara (Brahman) and jiva (Atman) to be different from each other to be outside the domain of Vedanta. Also Shankara considers Vishnu, Siva, Indra, Brahma, etc. as equally upasya-s to attain that devatahood / svarga. Attaining devatahood is admitted in Vedanta as a worldly fruit of upasana. These are all upasya brahma.
Quite contrary to the above, Shankara shows the Jneya Brahma in the following where the idea of ‘attaining devata/hood’ (a saamsaaric state) and ‘realizing Brahman for moksha’ are clearly distinguished in the Bh.Gita and the Bhashya. What comes out as a crucial takeaway is the distinction between ‘Vishnu’ as a devataa-vishesha and ‘Vishnu’ as Nirguna Para Brahman. Bhagavadgita Bhashyam 7.23:
अन्तवत्तु फलं तेषां
तद्भवत्यल्पमेधसाम् ।
देवान्देवयजो यान्ति
मद्भक्ता यान्ति मामपि ॥ २३ ॥
7.23 That result of theirs who are of poor intellect is indeed limited. The worshipers of gods go to the gods. My devotees go to Me alone.
[Reading the Kenopanishad bhashya cited above together with this Gita verse, worshiping gods such as Vishnu, Ishvara, Indra, etc.is by those with poor intellect compared to those who try to realize Brahman.]
अन्तवत् विनाशि तु फलं तेषां तत् भवति अल्पमेधसां अल्पप्रज्ञानाम् । देवान्देवयजो यान्ति देवान् यजन्त इति देवयजः, ते देवान् यान्ति, मद्भक्ता यान्ति मामपि । एवं समाने अपि आयासे मामेव न प्रपद्यन्ते अनन्तफलाय, अहो खलु कष्टं वर्तन्ते, इत्यनुक्रोशं दर्शयति भगवान् ॥ २३ ॥
7.23 Since those non-discriminating men with desires are engaged in disciplines for limited results, therefore, tat phalam, that result; tesam, of theirs; alpamedhasam, who are of poor intellect, of poor wisdom; antavat tu bhavati, is limited, ephemeral, indeed. Deva-yajah, the worshippers of gods; yanti, go; devan, to the gods. Madbhaktah, My devotees; yanti, to; mam api, to Me alone. ‘Thus, though the effort needed is the same, they do not resort to me alone for the unlimited result. Alas! they are surely in a pitiable condition.’ In this manner the Lord expresses his compassion.
BGB 9.25:
येऽपि अन्यदेवताभक्तिमत्त्वेन अविधिपूर्वकं यजन्ते, तेषामपि यागफलं अवश्यंभावि । कथम् ? —
The result of a sacrifice is inevitable even for those who worship ignorantly out of their devotion to other deities. How?
यान्ति देवव्रता देवान्पितॄन्यान्ति पितृव्रताः ।
भूतानि यान्ति भूतेज्या यान्ति मद्याजिनोऽपि माम् ॥ २५ ॥
9.25 Votaries of the gods reach the gods; the votarites of the manes go to the manes; the worshippers of the Beings reach the Beings; and those who worship Me reach Me.
[The corollary is ‘all the deities named above in the Kena Bhashya are anya devata-s.]
यान्ति गच्छन्ति देवव्रताः देवेषु व्रतं नियमो भक्तिश्च येषां ते देवव्रताः देवान् यान्ति । पितॄन् अग्निष्वात्तादीन् यान्ति पितृव्रताः श्राद्धादिक्रियापराः पितृभक्ताः । भूतानि विनायकमातृगणचतुर्भगिन्यादीनि यान्ति भूतेज्याः भूतानां पूजकाः । यान्ति मद्याजिनः मद्यजनशीलाः वैष्णवाः मामेव यान्ति । समाने अपि आयासेमामेव न भजन्ते अज्ञानात् , तेन ते अल्पफलभाजः भवन्ति इत्यर्थः ॥ २५ ॥
9.25 Deva-vratah, votaries of the gods, those whose religious observances [Making offerings and presents, circumambulation, bowing down, etc.] and devotion are directed to the gods; yanti, reach, go to; devan, the gods. Pitr-vratah, the votaries of the manes, those who are occupied with such rites as obseies etc., who are devoted to the manes; go pitrn, to the manes such as Agnisvatta and others. Bhutejyah, the Beings such as Vinayaka, the group of Sixteen (divine) Mothers, the Four Sisters, and others. And madyajinah, those who worship Me, those who are given to worshipping Me, the devotees of Visnu; reach mam, Me alone. Although the effort (involved) is the same, still owing to ingorance they do not worship Me exclusively. Thery they attain lesser results.
BGB 12.20:
‘अद्वेष्टा सर्वभूतानाम्’ (भ. गी. १२ । १३), इत्यादिना अक्षरोपासकानां निवृत्तसर्वैषणानां सन्यासिनां परमार्थज्ञाननिष्ठानां धर्मजातं प्रक्रान्तम् उपसंह्रियते —
ये तु धर्म्यामृतमिदं
यथोक्तं पर्युपासते ।
श्रद्दधाना मत्परमा
भक्तास्तेऽतीव मे प्रियाः ॥ २० ॥
But those devotees who accept Me as the supreme Goal, and with faith seek for this ambrosia [M.S.’s reading is dharmyamrtam-nectar in the form of virtue. Virtue is called nectar because it leads to Immortality, or because it is sweet like nectar.] which is indistinguishable from the virtues as stated above, they are very dear to Me.
[The corollary is those who accept Brahman as the supreme goal are different from those who remain worshipers of gods listed in the Kena Bhashya.]
ये तु संन्यासिनः धर्म्यामृतं धर्मादनपेतं धर्म्यं च तत् अमृतं च तत् , अमृतत्वहेतुत्वात् , इदं यथोक्तम् ‘अद्वेष्टा सर्वभूतानाम्’ (भ. गी. १२ । १३) इत्यादिना पर्युपासते अनुतिष्ठन्ति श्रद्दधानाः सन्तः मत्परमाः यथोक्तः अहं अक्षरात्मा परमः निरतिशया गतिः येषां ते मत्परमाः, मद्भक्ताः च उत्तमां परमार्थज्ञानलक्षणां भक्तिमाश्रिताः, ते अतीव मे प्रियाः । ‘प्रियो हि ज्ञानिनोऽत्यर्थम्’ (भ. गी. ७ । १७) इति यत् सूचितं तत् व्याख्याय इह उपसंहृतम् ‘भक्तास्तेऽतीव मे प्रियाः’ इति । यस्मात् धर्म्यामृतमिदं यथोक्तमनुतिष्ठन् भगवतः विष्णोः परमेश्वरस्य अतीव प्रियः भवति, तस्मात् इदं धर्म्यामृतं मुमुक्षुणा यत्नतः अनुष्ठेयं विष्णोः प्रियं परं धाम जिगमिषुणा इति वाक्यार्थः ॥ २० ॥
12.20 Tu, but; ye bhaktah, those devotees of Mine, the monks who have resorted to the highest devotion consisting in the knowledge of the supreme Reality; mat-paramah, who accept Me as the supreme Goal, to whom I, as mentioned above, who am identical with the Immutable, am the highest (parama), unsurpassable Goal; …….After having explained what was hinted in, ‘For I am very much dear to the man of Knowledge৷৷.'(7.17), that has been concluded here in, ‘Those devotees are very dear to Me.’ Since by seeking for this ambrosia which is indistinguishable from the virtues as stated above one becomes very dear to Me, who am the Lord Vishnu, the supreme God, therefore this nectar which is indistinguishable from the virtues has to be diligently sought for by one who is a seeker of Liberation, who wants to attain the coveted Abode of Visnu. This is the purport of the sentence.
[The term ‘Vishnu’ does not refer to the finite entity ‘Vishnu’ listed along with others in the Kenopanishad bhashya. This Vishnu is Nirguna Brahman.]
From the above cited Bh.Gita verses and the Bhashyam the following conclusions arise:
For the concept of a deva/deity being an attainable one and also can be the conveyor of the Tattva Jnana is seen, for example, in the Pratardanaadhikarana of the Brahma sutra 1.1.28 onward. Here, Indra, a Jnani, is the Acharya to Pratardana, the aspirant. Indra teaches ‘Contemplate on Me (Kaushitaki Upanishat)’. The question, in short, is whether the ‘Me’ refers to Indra the devata or Brahman. The Purvapakshin argues that it could be Indra the devata since that is also an attainment. The Siddhantin rebuts saying ‘since the aspirant has asked for the teaching that would be most beneficial (hita-tamam) to him, in the superlative, it has to be Brahman alone and not the attainment of Indra, the devata, which is only a saamsaaric attainment.
This rule shows that, for Shankara, in the Kenopanishat bhashya, Vishnu, different from the aspirant, is also one of the devata-s to be attained through upasana, However, the Jneya Brahman, whose knowledge results in moksha, is never a deity different from oneself. Thus the Me in the Bhagavadgita is decidedly Para Brahman and not a finite devata within creation that is attainable. By this it is meant that a jiva by upasana, etc. can attain to the status of the devata. The Gita itself talks of attainment of deva-s by aspirants distinguishing the deva-s from Para Brahman.
Shankara does not rebut the Kenopanishad bhashya purvapaksha fully because the position that one can attain a devataa and its rupa is admitted in the vedanta. This is authenticated both by the Brahmasutra bhashya cited and the Bh.Gita verses quoted above. Shankara refutes only the aspect that jiva is different from Brahman. It is also noteworthy that the attaining to a devata by upasana is shown as inferior to trying and realizing identity with Brahman and get liberated. Since all devatas cited by Shankara in the Kena bhashya are within creation, the attainment to them is within samsara. This is brought out in the Bh.Gita too. Maam Upetya to Kaunteya punarjanma na vidyate 8.16 of the Gita is about realizing Brahman.
Om Tat Sat
Shankaracharya’s ‘para-kaaya-pravesha’ in the light of a Mahabharata episode
In the Madhaviya Shankara Vijaya is the episode where Shankaracharya, in the context of a debate with Ubhaya Bharati, uses the yoga siddhi of ‘para kaaya pravesha’ (getting into someone else’s body). This is discussed in this article in the light of a somewhat similar episode of the Mahabharata:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/zd40ci13xbgc2ep/On_Shankaracharya_Parakayapravesha.pdf/file
Om Tat Sat
Namaste
Recently in some Whatsapp groups and FB someone circulated an audio of noted Madhva scholar Sri Bannanje Govindacharya in Kannda. It was clarified later that this audio is only a clipping of a larger one which comprised of his class on a text of his school to his students at home very long ago. What created a furor among followers of Shankaracharya is his remarks on Shankara that one can at once say are unsavory. The gist of his remarks is:
Shankara does not allow/want anyone to question; what he says is to be accepted.
There is no answer to the question ‘whose is avidya?’ in Shankara’s system. The scholar cites a few lines from Shankara’s Gita bhashya 13.2 where a dialogue is used by Shankara to bring out from the questioner’s mouth the answer to the question. However, the scholar aborts the dialogue prematurely and concludes ‘there is no reply to this question.’
Two senior scholars of Advaita have recorded their replies to the above, in Kannada and clarified the matter. In the file uploaded in this URL, I have included all these audios, cited the Gita and Brihadaranyaka Bhashyam, their translation in English and Kannada (from images of Sri SSS’s translation):
https://drive.google.com/open?id=19tKV63urIGp8LQ6Aq9p1mdYNhPhparNj
Subsequently, a disciple of Sri Bannanje Acharya has released an audio in reply to the above rejoinders, in Kannada. However, he has not touched on the core matter but meandered into various other topics. I have not referred to this in the above file.
warm regards
http://www.mediafire.com/file/97dbdm5ouw5a8x6/Harikathamrutasaara-1-11_01.mp3/file
The above is an audio recording in Kannada by the renowned Dvaita scholar on ‘Shankara – a split personality’.
Om Tat Sat
Here is an article in FB on the topic ‘Shankaracharya – Maniman – non-connection’ in Kannada.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/vedaonline/permalink/2378643705738560/
At present I am not making an English translation.
Om Tat Sat