sgadkari2001 at yahoo.com
Fri Jul 23 00:40:45 CDT 2010
Namaste Shri Vidyasankar,
Thanks for following up on this.
To summarize and highlight some points. This topic certainly needs more
at least from my side. So I will conclude my views on this topic with this post.
1. Gita 15.16, 15.7 and 15.18 seem to hold the key to unlock the teachings of
2. We have three entities: uttama puruSa, akSara puruSa, kSara puruSa in the
Level-1: uttama puruSa
Level-2: Adi mAyA in Her vyakta-avyakta form
Level-3a: akSara puruSa: the most evolved puruSa (limiting case) in
realm of Adi mAyA.
Level-3b: kSara puruSa: all other jIva-s in the realm of mAyA
3. The real question is not about splitting 13.13 in a manner that makes sense
(it is a mistake on my part not to clearly point this out earlier), but about
reconciling Gita 8.3 with the above three shloka-s (15.16-18).
Option A: akSara and hence param brahma of 8.3 at Level-1 described above,
Option B: akSara and hence param brahma of 8.3 at Level-2.
- You have presented arguments to support option A while I have been
4. Now regarding the shloka 13.13, which I feel is a topic of secondary
we again have two possible splits:
Split A: anAdimat, param-brahma na sat tat na asat ucyate
Split B: anAdi matparam brahma na sat tat na asat ucyate
- You have argued in favour of Split A - amRtam promised in the first half
of the shloka is possible only from knowing param brahma which by option
above is same as uttama puruSa.
- In my view, if we opt for Option B above, both split A, and split B are
equally possible. However here again, the brahma or param-brahma is only
at Level-2 (Adi mAyA). Note: amRtam promised in the first half of the
is equally attainable from knowledge of Adi mAyA.
I meant to respond to this mail quite a few days ago, but got distracted with
things. To me it seems that the usage of akshara in gItA verse 15.16 is a
case, as it is only there that akshara purusha is identified with kUTastha.
all other usages of akshara in Sruti and smRti refer to parabrahman. As a matter
textual interpretation, I would be wary of extending the special usage in one
to all general cases elsewhere.
Coming back to anAdimatparam brahma, there is still what is called pada-sangati
to consider - the consistency and continuity of meaning within the verse. We
to constantly keep the first line in mind before parsing anAdimatparam. In this
brahman is to be known (jneyaM yat tat), knowing which confers immortality (yaj
jnAtva amRtam aSnute). As per my reading of the verse and the commentary, I
submit that this can only be consistent with parsing anAdimatparam as anAdimat +
param, rather than as anAdi + matparam. The reasons for this have already been
covered in previous posts on this thread.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list