[Advaita-l] Ishwara Swarupam
bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
Fri Apr 13 00:19:52 CDT 2012
Sankara clearly says that Narayana, who is beyond Hiranyagarbha and
is nirupadhika. Therefore He is paramartika.
> if this nArAyaNa is called nirupAdhika, then there is no problem in
calling him as para brahman and pAramArthika. nArAyaNa paraM brahma,
tattvaM nArAyaNa paraH says even shruti also. But if you have
lakshmipati, shesha shayana srimannArAyaNa in mind while saying
nirupAdhika nArAyaNa, then he is not nirupAdhika, he is saguNa, sAkAra.
Hence, cannot be absolutely termed as parabrahman!!
His maya is non-different from Him and therefore not an upadhi.
> yes, mAya is not different from HIM, but he is NOT mAya either.
Please let me know if you think this is wrong and if so why.
> The answer depends upon the context in which we are discussing this
Any vedic conception of Him as Vaishnavara, Surya etc. is due to
vishishtopadhi. It is saguna and sopadhika. It is not paramartika.
> is it Vaishnavara or vaishvAnara ?? If it is vaishvAnara, then it is
too not different from THAT, ahaM vaishvAnarO bhUtvA prANinAM
dehamAshritaH, clarifies lord in geeta.
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list