[Advaita-l] Supreme Brahman - the Ruler in Advaita?
rajaramvenk at gmail.com
Sun Apr 14 08:54:56 CDT 2013
On Sunday, April 14, 2013, V Subrahmanian wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Rajaram Venkataramani <
> > explains Madhusudana in BhG 4. Advaita, therefore, is absolute non-dual
> > theism not monism.
> I think the term 'non-dual theism' is a word without anything to
> substantiate its use. Theism is defined by the Merriem webster dictionary
> // belief in the existence of a god or gods; *specifically* *:* belief in
> the existence of one God viewed as the creative source of the human race
> and the world who transcends yet is immanent in the world//
> If we want to adopt the term theism to describe Advaita, then we have to
> allow a world that is created by God, the Creator. But in advaita there is
> no world in absolute terms; it is mithyA and does not have a real
> existence. Brahman alone is the sole Reality according to Advaita. The
> moment we admit of a theism, then necessarily there comes in a
> deity-devotee relationship which is eternal, even continuing in moksha,
> according to the theistic schools of vedanta. Such a relationship
> essentially is dualistic and can never be non-dual. Even if one were to
> give up the relationship, then, still, to maintain the term theism, we need
> to have at least the created world subsisting eternally. Even this is
> denied in Advaita as there is no world in paramartha. Thus a 'non-dual
> theism' is a misnomer for Advaita.
RV: The definition of god need not come from Webster. It should be from BhG
8 or 15 as done by Krishna, Sankara and Madhusudana. In the third stage of
Bhakti - "I am He", the devotee does not transact in a dualist mode. This
Bhakti is eternal and does not need a world to stick God and Devotee in.
All names and forms are present in Ishwara as Ishwara Himself. If it is not
there, it is not Brahman. (rf.BSB 2.1.14). Secondly, in eka jiva vada,
there is room for even lila in an eternal loka.
> Sri Madhusudana Saraswati, in his
> invocatory verse for the Advaitasiddhi says:
> सत्यज्ञानसुखात्मकः श्रुतिशिखोत्थाखण्डधीगोचरः ।
> मिथ्याबन्धविधूननेन परमानन्दैकतानात्मकं
> *मोक्षं प्राप्त इव स्वयं विजयते* विष्णुर्विकल्पोज्झितः ॥ इति ।
> The verse says 'VishNu (Brahman) who is innately satya, jnana and sukha, is
> the abode of the universe consisting of the unreal dvaita of knower,
> knowing and known conjured up by mAyA, and owing to the
> akhaNDAkAravRtti-based realization of His native Ananda svarUpa, being
> freed from the apparent bondage shines as though liberated, free from all
> the vikalpa-s.'
> Thus there is no room for a theism in absolute Advaita. Even the 'Vishnu'
> is none other than the one appearing as jiva in avidyA. When all the
> vikalpa-s go, there remains no duality whatsoever.
RV: No duality but Vishnu remains as Ishanashila.
> Further, it is incorrect to attribute 'creatorship' to Brahman as such an
> attribute is only world-dependent and not independently inhering in
> Brahman. Supposing there is a sports club in my office. I can become its
> secretary by virtue only of my being an employee of the office. The post
> is contingent on my continuing in that office as an employee. The
> secretaryship is not inherent in, svarUpa of, me. It comes to me from
> something extraneous to me. In the same way when we attribute creatorship
> and a host of all other guNa-s to Brahman, every one of them, without a
> single exception, has to depend on the world or the jIva. Thus, to have
> all the guNa-s, the Lord, VishNu or any other, has to invariably be at the
> mercy of the world-jiva-s. Such attributes are really no absolute ones as
> they do not belong to the Lord as Himself.
RV: Ishwara does not jiva- jagat mercy to exist. The names and forms inhere
in Him as Himself in absolute identity. It is appropriate to say that these
attributes are not there in Ishwara
> Thus, given the dependence of the world-jivas on Brahman for their very
> existence/reality, the ONLY example of such paratantra satyatva being
> rope-snake, the world-jivas have to be mithyA. The attributes that accrue
> to Brahman through such mithyA entity is never real to Brahman. Thus, the
> idea of absolute theism, whether dualistic or non-dualistic, is an
> impossibility in Vedanta.
> > On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 1:47 AM, kuntimaddi sadananda <
> > kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Shree Rajaram - PraNAms
> > >
> > > nirupaadika
> > > brahman or turiiyam in mantra 7 of Mandukya is the same as
> > > satyam-jnaanam-anantam Braham - even the words- satyam-jnaanam-anantam
> > > only
> > > from the reference of vyaavahaarika only - as Mandukya matra 7 says
> > > -avyavahaaryam, agraahyam, advaitam, prapancopashamam etc. all
> > descriptions
> > > which cannot be described - for helping a saadhak to shift the mind to
> > > grasp
> > > the essence using viveka - and is only called fourth - chaturtam
> > > - in
> > > relation to the three states. Even so called parabrahman - is only from
> > the
> > > point of vyaavahaarika only.
> > > You
> > > statement - that starts with - this parabrahma appears ... Any
> > > is
> > > from vyavahaara point only and it involves upaadika not nirupaadika.
> > Hence
> > > it
> > > is same as Iswara with maayaa as upaadhi. There is only vyaavahaarika
> > > paaramaarthika - the latter being absolutely real and sat. While the
> > > former,
> > > the vyaavahaarika involves as I said - Brahman + upaadhi - either at
> > jiiva
> > > level or Iswara level - anupravesha statement of the scriptures
> > as
> > > though entering into the upaadhi. avataara is brahman -as though-
> > > descending
> > > taking an appropriate upaadhi to solve a local problem. Hence Krishna
> > > located and as son of Devaki.
> > > Personally I do not see any
> > > problem in accounting the paaramaarthika and vyaavahaarika and if one
> > > include
> > > the individual mental projections - praatibhaasika.
> > > In essence anything that has
> > > property has finiteness associated with it. Nirguna brahman is pure
> > > paaramaarthika only.
> > > Hari Om!
> > > Sadananda
> > >
> > >
> > > >________________________________
> > > > From: "rajaramvenk at gmail.com" <rajaramvenk at gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >However, in this thread we are talking about nirupadhika brahman that
> > > Sankara and Madhusudana talk about in BhG 15 and BhG 8. Just as
> > > calls turiya as Ishwara, Sankara calls Him Ishanashila or Narayanana
> > > Madhusudana calls it Vasusdeva. This is a state of un-differentiated
> > > knowledge or the state of Vishnu. This parabrahman appears as Krishna
> > > without becoming anatma. He takes the qualities of anatma when He
> > > as jagat but not when He appears as Krishna. Any form is prakrta but
> > > form is apraktram, paramayarupam and pure consciousness. This nitya
> > suddha
> > > buddha mukta Krishna, the son of Devaki and Yasoda, is the garland of
> > > gopis who are jnanis. Janaka attained jnana because of being a jijnasa
> > > whereas gopis started as jnanis by being totally selfless and
> > > in their love for Krishna. Some contemporary advaita scholars, jnanis
> > > though they may be, don't recognise the position of gopis as did
> > > Madhusudana. They think
> > > gopis went to Brahmaloka as do normal sadhakas. There is a huge
> > > difference between worshipping Krishna as the Self and as non-Self.
> > > para-bhakti, which is advayajnanam, is non-different from Him, who is
> > > bliss, says Madhusudana.
> > > >Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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:
> > >
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list