[Advaita-l] Shankara authenticates Shiva as the son of Brahma
vmurthy36 at gmail.com
Sat Aug 13 10:18:25 CDT 2016
Ishwara is a dream object. If you take Ishwara without Upadhi He is
the Self. But if you do that there will not be Sudarshana Chakra
holding Vishnu or Trishula holding Siva. If you take Vishnu or Siva as
Nirguna Brahman there is no problem. My comment was for Vishnu as
Ishwara and holding Sudarshana Chakra and other qualities or Siva with
Trishula and other qualities.
On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ishvara is not a dream object. He is myself. I'm merely correcting the
> misconception that one aspect of me is low and the other is high.
> On 13 Aug 2016 1:34 p.m., "Venkatesh Murthy" <vmurthy36 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> It is like arguing and worrying what colour is the horse in a dream
>> you have seen. The horse may be white or black. Who cares? It is only
>> a dream. Your imagination. From the Supreme Ishwara down to a tiny ant
>> everything is existing in your imagination. Why fight on some
>> imagination? Nothing is real except your Self. That Self is Brahman.
>> The Vedantic Brahman is not Vishnu not Siva or other. It is the Self.
>> On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l
>> <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> > Firstly it is arthavAda, not to be taken literally.
>> > Secondly, you have several similar instances in slokas composed by
>> > mahAtmAs, some by Shankaracharya himself, where for the benefit of
>> > ajnani
>> > devotees, he says that I am a sinner, ajnAni, please help me Lord. It
>> > doesn't mean Shankaracharya is an ajnAni or a sinner, it is said on
>> > behalf
>> > of such devotees.
>> > Thirdly, as I have said Rudra is an amshA. When Sri Rama was lamenting
>> > over
>> > the loss of Sita one cannot say that the sarvajna Narayana is lamenting,
>> > and for that lament to be cited as a reason to deny Narayana's
>> > Ishvaratvam.
>> > Regards,
>> > Venkatraghavan
>> > On 13 Aug 2016 1:02 p.m., "D Gayatri" <dgayatrinov10 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Alright, you have a point. So I will explain why you can't compare
>> >> birth
>> >> of Rudra from Prajapati to that of Ishwara taking an incarnation. This
>> >> is
>> >> because, the baby Rudra, in the satapatha brahmana episode, cries that
>> >> he
>> >> is not free from sins. Certainly, this is not the mark of Ishwara,
>> >> since
>> >> Ishwara is always free from sins.
>> >> Regards
>> >> Gayatri
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>> > For assistance, contact:
>> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list