saguNa and nirguNa are the same
Ravisankar S. Mayavaram
miinalochanii at YAHOO.COM
Tue Nov 16 14:48:29 CST 1999
I think it is appropriate to include vishnusahasranama bhaShya and
trishatii bhashya. To me the purpose of the discussion is to understand
about saguNa/nirguNa aspects of brahman and not establishing whether
prabodha sudhaakara is an authentic work or not. This topic will be of
importance in such bhAshya-s where bhagavAn's kalyANa guNa-s are
discussed, the naamas that highlight nirguNa aspect will stand in
contrast and make the commentator say something specific.
About the authenticity of this work or any other work, I would believe
only if Acharya-s of shR^ingagiri or kAnchi comment on it. Let us not
flatter ourselves assuming that we are competent to do that, so much so
when are all changing our views like changing clothes.
I request the members to post their understanding on this subject based
vivekachuuDamani and any other works of shankara they are aware of.
--- Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <ramakris at EROLS.COM> wrote:
> I notice that people have been quoting works other than the
> prasthAnatrayI. Ashish Chandra also dug up some old post of mine. My
> views have changed quite a bit regarding this topic from 3-4 years
> back. I wish I had followed my own advice (which I implicitly gave in
> that post) and consulted some proper teachers regarding the
> of various works and their interpretation. The problem is that I read
> stuff written by "scholars" who were not advaitins and misunderstood
> many things.
> Giri once wrote to me that he had consulted some sannyAsis in
> Rishikesh and that they were quite assertive that sha.nkara says the
> same thing in all bhAshhyas to the prasthAnatrayI. Even after that I
> did not learn my lesson. I still thought that sha.nkara said
> things in different bhAshhyas and invented my own explanation for it.
> 3-4 years later, with more experience and better understanding (I
> hope), I have changed my position *completely* on this topic. I wish
> had listened to the wisdom of those Swamis and done some proper
> research right at that time. There is no higher or lower aspirant,
> sha.nkara says *exactly* the same things, be it the sUtra bhAshhya or
> mANDUkya bhAshhya. The book which helped me understand this fact is
> Sri Subbaramaiya's, "Sri Dakshinamurti Stotram (A study based on the
> Manasollasa and Tattvasudha)," published by the Sringeri Sharada
> Matham. Sri Satchidanandendra Saraswati of Holenarsipur has also
> how all the bhAshhyas on the prasthAnatrayI say the same things very
> So, to sum up: Let's stick to the bhAshhyas on the prasthAnatrayI and
> the upadeshasAhasrI and compare the prabodhasudhAkara with these.
> Other texts are useful, but not as useful as these. In fact the other
> texts can only be interpreted in the light of these fundamental
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam
Archives : http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l.html
Help : Email to listmaster at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
Options : To leave the list send a mail to
listserv at lists.advaita-vedanta.org with
SIGNOFF ADVAITA-L in the body.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list